'Ww'^''^ 


tihvavy  of  ^he  theological  Seminary 

PRINCETON  •  NEW  JERSEY 


•a^^j)' 


BX  8  .S5 

Shields,  Charles  W.  1825- 

1904. 
The  United  Church  of  the 

United  States 


THE   UNITED   CHURCH 


UNITED   STATES 


THE   UNITED    CHURCH 


OF   THE 


<^*'<  Of  Pfi'*6^ 


UNITED    STATES 


■Logical  st\^ 


BY 


J 


CHARLES    WOODRUFF    SHIELDS 

PROFESSOR    IN    PRINCETON   UNIVERSITY 


NEW    YORK 

CHARLES    SCRIBNER'S    SONS 

1895 


Copyright,  1S95,  by  Charles  W.  Shields 


TO  THE 

CATHOLIC  UNITY  CIRCLE 

COMPRISING   THE    REVEREND    DOCTORS 

edward  abbott  edward  b.  coe 

David  Nelson  beach  Charles  Cuthbert  Hall 

George  Dana  boardman  William  Reed  Huntington 

amory  H.  Bradford  Wm.  Chauncy  Langdon 

Charles  Augustus  Briggs  Henry  Y.  Satterlee 

THESE   COLLECTED   ESSAYS   ARE   INSCRIBED 

WITH   THE   BROTHERLY   LOVE   OF 

THE  AUTHOR. 


PREFACE. 


It  has  been  becoming  evident  to  many  thoughtful  observ- 
ers that  the  chief  Christian  problem  of  our  age  is  the  Re- 
union of  Christendom,  and  that  the  most  favorable  conditions 
for  its  solution  are  found  in  this  New  World,  where  the 
churches  and  denominations  of  the  Old  World  have  become 
compacted  together  within  a  new  political  environment,  yet 
with  perfect  freedom  of  action  and  intercourse.  The  growth 
of  public  interest  in  the  question  during  the  past  ten  years 
has  been  surprising.  If  the  present  volume  have  no  higher 
value,  it  may  serve  to  mark  the  course  of  opinion  in  this  new 
direction,  and  to  afford  some  outlook  for  the  future.  It  con- 
tains the  results  not  only  of  private  study,  but  of  conference 
with  representative  thinkers  holding  all  the  possible  views  in 
respect  to  the  problem  of  American  Church  Unity. 

The  interest  of  the  writer  in  the  subject  dates  as  far  back 
as  the  year  1862,  when  he  published  a  Manual  of  Worship  in 
the  United  States  Army  and  Navy,  compiled  from  ancient 
liturgies  and  modern  formularies,  and  jointly  recommended 
by  eminent  clergymen  of  all  denominations.  This  was  fol- 
lowed in  1864  by  his  edition  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer, 
as  amended  by  the  Presbyterian  Divines  in  the  Royal  Com- 
mission of  1661,  and  as  designed,  with  other  more  special 
objects,  "to  increase  the  spirit  of  catholicity  and  fraternity 
among  such  Churches  of  the  Reformation  as  originally  con- 
tributed to  the  formation  of  the  Prayer-book,  by  restoring 
to  more  general  use  those  liturgical  formulas  which  are 
their  several  production  or  common  inheritance  and,  next 
to  the  Holy  Scriptures,  the  closest  visible  bonds  of  their 
unity."     Some  results  of  his  studies  at  that  time  were  em- 

v 


vi  Preface. 

bodied  in  an  essay  which,  after  awaiting  a  ripened  state  of 
public  interest  for  twenty  years,  at  length  appeared  in  the 
Century  Magazine  of  1885,  under  the  title  of  "The  United 
Churches  of  the  United  States,"  and  at  once  drew  forth  a  wide 
discussion  from  leading  divines  in  different  denominations. 
Together  with  that  discussion,  it  forms  the  first  part  of  this 
collection  of  papers.  As  belonging  to  the  early  history  of 
the  question  it  is  presented  without  amendment,  although 
some  expressions  and  suggestions  have  already  been  made 
obsolete  by  the  rapid  progress  of  opinion. 

In  the  following  year  the  House  of  Bishops  of  the  Protest- 
ant Episcopal  Church  at  Chicago  issued  the  proposals,  after- 
ward amended  by  the  Lambeth  Conference  of  1888,  and  now 
known  as  the  Quadrilateral  or  Four  Articles  of  Church  Unity. 
The  author  has  advocated  these  articles  in  a  paper  read  before 
various  circles  of  representative  divines  in  New  York,  Boston, 
Philadelphia,  Baltimore,  and  Washington,  and  before  several 
public  assemblies,  after  introductory  addresses  by  President 
Seth  Low,  of  Columbia  College;  by  President  Daniel  Oilman, 
of  the  Johns  Hopkins  University,  and  by  the  Hon.  Justice 
William  Strong,  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court.  It  is 
here  reproduced,  with  a  review  of  some  of  the  valuable  opin- 
ions to  which  it  gave  expression. 

The  other  essays  refer  to  different  practical  aspects  of  the 
question  as  still  under  discussion ;  and  two  essays  have  been 
added,  which  are  designed  to  illustrate  the  unifying  value  of 
the  English  liturgy  among  the  Christian  denominations,  and 
the  momentous  importance  of  church  unity  as  a  Sociological 
Question. 

The  periodical  press  has  been  furnishing  us  with  various 
symposia,  which  at  times  make  church  unity  look  like  a 
bubble  or  a  dream.  For  some  minds  even  the  iridescence 
is  gone.  But  other  minds  only  see  more  plainly  that  the 
great  problem  is  not  to  be  solved  by  the  denominational 
opinions  of  more  or  less  interested  leaders,  but  rather  by  a 
long  educational  process  requiring  many  years,  perhaps  sue- 


Preface.  vii 

cessive  generations,  ere  it  will  come  to  full  effect.  To  such 
.  minds  there  is  not  only  the  promise  of  Holy  Scripture  but 
the  losfic  of  Providence  in  the  movement.  If  there  be  such  a 
thing  as  historic  cause  and  effect,  the  chief  historic  Churches 
are  already  recoiling  from  their  rash  extremes  toward  sub- 
stantial agreement  and  re-union.  The  growth  of  Church 
unity  in  the  coming  century  would  be  no  more  marvelous 
than  that  of  State  unity  in  the  past  century.  In  the  ecclesi- 
astical as  well  as  political  sphere  our  country  seems  destined 
to  become  the  wonder  of  Christendom,  not  by  renewing  its 
time-worn  issues  and  fighting  them  over  again,  but  by  burying 
them  out  of  sight  forever  in  one  United  Church  of  the  United 
States. 


CONTENTS. 


■"■•  PAGE 

The  United  Churches  of  the  United  States, 1-32 

Organic  Unity  of  Churches. 

Germs  of  Organic  Unity. 

Agreements  in  Doctrine. 

Agreements  in  Polity. 

Agreements  in  Worship. 

Revivalism  and  Ritualism. 

The  Claims  of  yEstheticism. 

New-made  Liturgies. 

Excellence  of  the  English  Liturgy. 

Catholicity  of  the  English  Liturgy. 

Reaction  Toward  the  English  Liturgy. 

IL 

Denominational  Views  of  Church  Unity, 33-63 

Episcopalian  Opinions. 

Presbyterian  Opinions. 

Congregationalist  Opinions. 

Consensus  of  these  Opinions. 

Signs  of  Church  Unity. 

Proposals  of  the  House  of  Bishops. 

Historic  Relations  of  Presbytery  and  Episcopacy. 

Reunion  of  Presbytery  and  Episcopacy. 

Advantages  of  Historic  Episcopacy. 

III. 

The  Four  Articles  of  Church  Unity 65-109 

Church  Unity  Defined. 
Federation  of  Churches. 
Assimilation  of  Denominations. 
False  Ecclesiasticism. 
False  Denominationalism. 
Feasibility  of  Church  Unity. 
The  New  Promise  of  Church  Unity. 
The  Claim  of  the  Historic  Churches. 
The  Claim  of  the  Reformed  Churches. 
The  Need  of  a  Practical  Consensus. 
The  Chicago  and  Lambeth  Proposals. 
Catholicity  of  the  Four  Articles. 

ix 


X  Contents. 

Catholicity  of  the  Historic  Episcopate. 

Adaptability  of  the  Historic  Episcopate. 

Unifying  Power  of  the  Historic  Episcopate. 

Unitication  by  Confederation. 

Unification  by  Consolidation. 

Unification  by  Organic  Growth. 

Organic  Reunion  of  Presbytery  and  Episcopacy. 

Ideal  Fulfilment  of  Church  Unity. 

Slow  Growth  of  Church  Unity. 

Logical  Tendencies  to  Church  Unity. 

Decline  of  the  Denominational  Spirit., 

Revival  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Spirit. 

Popular  Tendencies  to  Church  Unity. 

The  Coming  Campaign  of  Education. 

IV.  PAGE 

Denominational  Views  OF  THE  Quadrilateral, m-ijr 

Congregational  Opinions. 

Presbyterial  Opinions. 

Episcopal  Opinions. 

Review  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Situation. 

Favorable  Signs. 

Unfavorable  Signs. 

V. 

The  Quadrilateral  Standard  among  the  Denominations,    .    .  135-165 

Congregational  Denominations. 
Presbyterial  Denominations. 
Episcopal  Denominations. 
Church  Unity  Societies. 
Catholic  Unity  Circles. 
Studies  in  the  Quadrilateral. 
The  League  of  Catholic  Unity. 

VI. 

The  Historic  Episcopate  and  the  Three  Church  Polities,  .    .  167-178 

Preliminary  Principles. 
The  Scriptural  Episcopate. 
The  Apostolic  Episcopate. 
The  New  Made  Episcopate. 
Comprehensiveness  of  the  Historic  Episcopate. 
Its  Alleged  Hierarchism. 
Its  Alleged  Sacerdotalism. 
Studies  in  the  Historic  Episcopate. 

VII. 

The  Historic  Presbyterate  and  the  Historic  Episcopate,   .    .  179-214 

Appeal  to  Presbyterians  and  Episcopalians. 

Apostolic  Succession. 

Practical  Union  by  Ignoring  the  Question. 


Contents.  xi 

Gradual  Unification. 
Pulpit  Exchanges. 
Presbyterian  Orders. 
Mutual  Recognition. 
Hypothetical  Ordination. 
Concurrent  Ordination. 
The  Hope  of  Reunion. 

VIII. 

The  Historic  Liturgy  and  the  Historic  Churches 215-256 

Analysis  of  Prayer  Book. 
Composition  of  Daily  Offices. 
Composition  of  Communion  Office. 
Composition  of  Baptismal  Offices. 
Composition  of  the  Occasional  Offices. 
Catholic  Formularies. 
Protestant  Formularies. 

IX. 

The  Sociological  Question  of  Church  Unity, 257-285 

Early  Christian  Socialism. 
Anti-Christian  Socialism. 
Spurious  Christian  Socialism. 
Christian  Doctrine  of  Social  Distinctions. 
Christian  Doctrine  of  Poverty. 
Christian  Doctrine  of  Stewardship. 
Non-Christian  Socialism. 
Church  and  State  Socialism. 
The  Masses  and  the  Classes. 
Capitalistic  Laborers. 
Derangement  of  Social  Classes. 
Social  Need  of  Church  Unity. 
The  Church  the  Great  Social  Teacher. 
The  Church  the  Social  Conservator. 
The  Church  the  Social  Regenerator. 
Urgent  Need  of  Church  Unity. 


I. 

THE  UNITED  CHURCHES  OF  THE 
UNITED  STATES. 


I. 

THE  UNITED  CHURCHES  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

The  associative  tendency  of  the  Christian  masses  has  shown 
itself  wherever  they  could  act  freely  together.  In  our  own 
country  for  more  than  a  hundred  years  there  has  been  a 
steady  effort  after  religious  unity,  following  the  political 
movement  through  the  successive  stages  of  the  colonization, 
the  confederation,  the  constitution,  and  the  recent  consolida- 
tion of  the  United  States.  During  the  colonial  period  the 
few  mission  churches  scattered  along  the  Atlantic  coast  were 
temporarily  fused  together  by  the  evangelistic  labors  of 
Whitefield  and  Wesley.  In  the  revolutionary  war  they  were 
simply  massed  and  compacted  in  the  common  struggle  for 
civil  as  well  as  religious  freedom.  Since  the  declaration  of 
Independence  we  have  seen  them  at  first  separately  organiz- 
ing themselves,  and  then  spontaneously  combining  in  great 
conmion  causes,  such  as  the  American  Bible  Society,  the 
American  Tract  Society,  the  American  Sunday  School 
Union,  the  American  Boards  of  Domestic  and  Foreign 
Missions,  as  well  as  the  various  moral  reforms  in  which 
they  became  leagued  against  vice  and  infidelity  on  the  plat- 
form of  their  common  Christianity.  In  the  late  civil  war 
they  appeared  as  one  holy  phalanx  of  charity  and  mercy  in 
the  Sanitary  and  Christian  commissions;  and  at  the  present 
time  they  are  interlaced  by  a  network  of  Young  Men's 
Christian  Associations,  Inter- Denominational  Alliances  and 
Church  Congresses,  designed  to  combine  them  practically  in 
Christian    work   and    intercourse,    to    say   nothing    of  inter- 

3 


4  The  United  Churches. 

ecclesiastical   councils,  based   upon   organic  bonds  of   unity 
between  kindred  churches. 

It  is  true  that  all  such  compacts,  being  temporary  expedi- 
ents, as  fast  as  they  serve  their  purposes  must  decay  and 
disappear;  and  it  is  also  true  that  in  some  cases  the  dissolu- 
tion of  a  league  of  churches  has  been  followed  by  their 
seeming  recoil  and  reassertion  of  sectarian  peculiarities  in 
more  pronounced  form  than  ever,  as  may  now  be  seen  in  the 
various  boards  of  charity  and  missions  maintained  by  the 
different  denominations.  But  it  will  be  found,  at  the  same 
time,  that  another  set  of  causes  has  been  tending,  if  not  to 
bring  them  together  again  in  closer  bonds  and  on  a  more 
enduring  basis,  yet  at  least  to  reveal  to  them,  more  and  more 
clearly,  the  ultimate  grounds  of  a  true  organic  unity. 

Organic  Unity  of  Churches. 
By  the  organic  unity  of  churches  is  here  meant  such  unity 
as  inheres  in  their  internal  organization,  and  is  traceable  in 
their  forms  of  doctrine,  government,  and  worship,  as  well 
as  in  their  whole  historic  life  and  development ;  and  is 
not,  therefore,  due  to  any  mere  artificial  arrangement  or 
conscious  effort.  Institutions  are  not  made,  but  grow; 
and  sometimes  they  grow  so  slowly  that  one  generation 
rejects  as  irrational  and  visionary  what  the  next  generation 
accepts  as  the  logic  of  events.  Whole  churches,  as  well  as 
states,  have  thus  been  reasoned  out  of  the  divine  right  of 
English  monarchy  and  American  slavery;  and  it  is  safe  to 
assume  that  any  scheme  of  ecclesiastical  union  which  could 
now  be  devised,  even  though  the  true  one,  would  be  repudi- 
ated, perhaps  by  all  existing  denominations,  as  involving  the 
suppression  of  some  essential  truth  or  the  sacrifice  of  some 
valuable  principle.  We  are  not  yet  ready  for  such  schemes, 
and  it  would  only  be  a  waste  of  time  to  discuss  them.  The 
first  lesson  to  be  learned  is,  that  the  unification  of  the  Ameri- 
can churches,  if  it  is  ever  to  come  at  all,  cannot  be  precipi- 
tated by  platforms,  coalitions,  compromises,  in  short  by  any 


Organic  Uiiity  of  Churches.  5 

mere  external  association  of  the  different  denominations, 
which  leaves  them  still  without  internal  modification  and 
vital  connection,  as  true  and  living  branches  of  the  Vine  of 
Christ. 

How  then  is  such  organic  unity  or  union  ever  to  be 
reached  ?  Perhaps  we  can  trace  a  rough  likeness  between 
the  case  of  the  American  churches  at  the  present  time  and 
that  of  the  American  states  at  the  close  of  the  revolution. 
The  articles  of  confederation  had  proved  a  rope  of  sand.  The 
colonies,  in  becoming  independent  of  the  British  crown,  had 
also  become  independent  of  one  another,  and  with  their  di- 
verse creeds,  institutions,  races,  and  climates  seemed  on  the 
verge  of  anarchy.  It  was  not  until  they  had  surrendered 
some  of  their  sovereign  attributes  and  readjusted  their  whole 
domestic  polity,  that  they  could  come  into  the  more  perfect 
union  of  the  constitution  ;  and  ever  since  then  they  have  been 
racked  with  internal  conflicts,  until  at  last  welded  together  by 
the  fiery  blows  of  civil  war.  In  like  manner  the  different 
denominations,  after  having  been  loosely  confederated  in 
various  compacts  and  alliances,  are  falling  apart  in  fresh  es- 
trangement, wasting  their  resources  in  mere  propagandism, 
and  often  wrangling  over  time-worn  theological  issues  in  the 
face  of  their  common  foes.  And  now,  it  is  thought  by  some, 
they  can  only  be  driven  together  again  by  the  rod  of  persecu- 
tion. The  peace  of  Westphalia,  they  will  tell  us,  was  but  a 
truce,  and  the  warfare  once  waged  between  the  Catholic  and 
Protestant  powers  of  Europe  is  yet  to  be  decided  by  some 
terrible  intestine  struggle  within  our  own  borders,  fulfilling 
the  great  Armageddon  of  the  Apocalypse.  With  the  sects 
thus  cast  into  the  furnace  of  affliction,  to  be  purged  of  their 
errors,  and  melted  and  molded  to  one  likeness,  the  church 
militant  is  at  length  to  come  forth  from  the  ordeal  united  and 
triumphant. 


6  The  United  Chw^ches. 

Germs  of  Organic  Unity. 

We  need  not,  however,  push  a  mere  poHtical  analogy  so 
far.  Rather  may  we  hope  that  the  age  of  religious  wars  is 
past,  and  that  any  remaining  issues  between  religious  parties 
are  to  be  fought  out,  not  with  carnal  weapons,  but  with  spir- 
itual. Certainly,  the  American  churches  have  at  least  gained 
all  the  freedom  that  they  need.  Free  of  the  state  and  free  of 
one  another,  they  may  now  peacefully  work  out  their  respec- 
tive missions  without  let  or  hindrance.  But  while  thus  left 
to  the  combined  action  of  Providential  events  and  spiritual 
causes,  it  is  inevitable  that  in  the  long  future  they  will 
undergo  much  modification,  perhaps  gradual  assimilation  to 
each  other,  or  to  some  one  divine  model  toward  which  they 
are  tending.  Despite  their  present  divided  and  distracted 
appearance,  if  we  will  survey  them  from  a  high  outside  point 
of  view,  in  a  Christian  philosophical  mood,  we  shall  discern 
amongst  them  vast  unifying  tendencies  which  have  been  oper- 
ating quietly  through  successive  generations,  and  which  can 
only  be  measured  by  comparing  one  period  of  their  history 
with  another.  We  can  no  more  control  such  tendencies  than 
we  can  control  the  winds  of  heaven.  It  is  the  part  of  wisdom 
to  recognize  them  and  shape  our  course  by  means  of  them. 
We  need  not  forsake  our  respective  positions;  we  cannot 
force  an  immediate  harmony  of  views;  but  at  least  we  may 
profitably  engage  in  a  study  of  the  existing  germs  or  grounds 
of  organic  unity  in  the  American  churches. 

In  entering  upon  this  study,  whatever  theories  of  the  church 
we  may  severally  hold,  we  should  lay  aside  even  just  preju- 
dices, so  far  as  to  take  into  view  impartially  the  various 
Christian  bodies  claiming  an  ecclesiastical  title  and  jurisdic- 
tion, which  are  co-extensive  with  the  nation,  or  which  may  be 
otherwise  due  them  in  courtesy.  Such  are  the  "  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Church  in  North  America,"  (Northern  and  South- 
ern) ;  the  "  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States " 
(Northern  and  Southern) ;  the  "  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 


Agreements  in  Doctrine.  7 

in  the  United  States  ;"  the  "  Reformed  Church  in  America  " 
(Dutch),  the  "  Reformed  Church  in  the  United  States " 
(German) ;  the  "  Roman  Catholic  Church,"  the  "  United 
Brethren  "  (German  and  Moravian),  the  "  United  Presbyterian 
Church  of  America,"  the  "  Universalist  Church  in  the  United 
States,"  the  "  Baptist  Churches  "  (Calvinistic  and  Arminian), 
the  "  Congregational  Churches  "  (Trinitarian),  the  "  Disciples 
of  Christ"  (Campbellite),  the  "Society  of  Friends,"  the 
"Unitarian  Churches."  Some  of  these  bodies,  and  others 
which  might  have  been  named,  are  inconsiderable  in  numbers 
and  influence,  and  not  likely  to  play  any  chief  part  in  the 
development  of  American  Christianity.  Confining  our  atten- 
tion to  the  great  Christian  denominations  of  the  country,  we 
may  fairly  concede  to  them  the  possession  of  ecclesiastical 
elements  more  or  less  perfectly  organized ;  and  our  task  will 
be  to  look  into  their  respective  forms  of  doctrine,  of  polity, 
and  of  worship,  in  search  of  the  three  corresponding  grounds 
of  unity  which  are  afforded  by  their  dogmatic  agreement, 
their  ecclesiastical  or  political  likeness,  and  their  hturgical 

culture. 

Agreements  in  Doctrine. 

The  first  of  these  three  grounds  of  unity  is  the  least  hope- 
ful. Perfect  consent  in  theological  views,  were  it  attained 
between  the  different  denominations,  might  indeed  issue  in 
their  perfect  union,  if  not  in  their  homogeneous  organiza- 
tion, since  among  other  doctrines  it  would  include  the  same 
doctrine  of  church  polity ;  but  it  may  be  doubted  if  such 
consent  is  in  the  nature  of  the  case  attainable.  Doctrinal 
distinctions  are  largely  due  to  the  paradoxical  relations  of 
essential  truths  which  are  alike  derived  from  Holy  Scripture, 
as  well  as  to  original  diversities  in  human  nature  which  are 
alike  legitimate.  Accordingly,  they  appeared  among  the 
Apostles  themselves  in  the  two  schools  of  St.  Paul  and  St. 
Peter;  they  were  renewed  among  the  church-fathers  by 
Augustine  and  Pelagius  ;  they  were  reaffirmed  among  the 
schoolmen  by  Thomas  Aquinas  and  Dun  Scotus  ;  they  were 


8  The  United  Churches. 

emphasized  among  the  reformers  by  Calvin  and  Arminius ; 
they  were  early  transferred  to  our  own  churches  by  Whitefield 
and  Wesley,  and  have  since  spread  with  enormous  growth 
over  the  whole  continent ;  and  they  are  likely  to  continue  in 
some  form  until  the  end  of  the  world. 

If  history  teaches  anything  plainly,  it  shows  that  the  at- 
tempt to  organize  churches  on  the  basis  of  mere  dogmatic 
distinctions  will  always  tend  to  schism  rather  than  unity. 
They  often  exclude  more  true  Christians  than  they  include, 
and  sooner  or  later  go  to  pieces  in  some  fresh  dissension. 
And  even  more  difficult  would  it  be  to  connect  together  con- 
flicting churches  on  such  a  basis.  It  is  certain  that  none  of 
the  leading  Protestant  confessions,  not  the  Augsburg,  not  the 
Belgic  or  Heidelberg,  not  the  Westminster,  not  the  Thirty- 
nine  Articles  would  now  be  generally  accepted  by  the  American 
churches.  It  is  doubtful  if  any  of  the  great  Catholic  creeds, 
the  Athanasian,  the  Nicene,  or  even  the  Apostles'  Creed, 
would  afford  a  platform  broad  enough  to  embrace  all  the 
denominations  calling  themselves  Christian.  And  still  less 
could  they  be  marshaled  together  by  any  of  the  new-made 
creeds  of  our  own  time  and  country. 

Nor  can  it  be  said  that  such  attempts  as  have  hitherto  been 
made  at  a  dogmatic  confederation  of  churches  have  been 
very  successful  or  promising.  The  Evangelical  Alliance  of 
Protestant  churches,  though  based  upon  a  partial  consent  in 
doctrine,  took  a  polemical  attitude  by  its  very  name  against 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  The  proposed  league  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  and  Russian  Greek  churches  would 
have  excluded  all  the  other  Protestant  churches,  besides 
covertly  involving  the  gravest  doctrinal  differences.  Even 
the  Presbyterian  churches  in  their  late  general  council  could 
not  reach  a  consensus  of  their  own  kindred  standards.  The 
Congregational  churches,  discarding  all  the  old  creeds,  are 
engaged  in  framing  a  new  one.  And  other  large  family 
groups  of  churches,  such  as  the  Baptist  and  the  Methodist, 
show   but   few   signs  of  either  agreeing  among  themselves 


Agreements  in  Docti'hie.  9 

or    seeking    agreement    with    the    rest    of    the    American 
churches. 

To  see  how  complex  is  the  problem  before  us,  we  should 
need  only  to  bring  together  the  various  creeds  and  confessions 
for  comparison  and  contrast,  and  arrange  them  in  their  de- 
o-rees  of  difference  between  the  extremes  of  Catholicism  and 

to 

Protestantism.     It  would  be  found,  at  the  first  view,  that  the 
points  of  variance  are  simply  endless,  embracing  a  variety  of 
opinions  upon  numerous  questions  in  every  department  of 
sacred  science,  theology,  anthropology,  christology,  soteriol- 
ogy,  ecclesiology,  eschatology.     On    closer  examination  we 
would  see  that  the  two  extremes  of  Unitarianism  and  Roman- 
ism, in  their  latest  outcome,  would  utterly  refuse  to  coalesce, 
consenting  in  nothing  but  the  few  articles  of  natural  religion 
which  Christianity  has  in  common  with  Judaism  and  Paganism. 
Next,  we  would  find  that  between  these  extremes  the  chief 
evangelical  confessions,  whilst  agreeing  with  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic creeds  in  some  essential  doctrines,  such  as  the  trinity,  the 
incarnation,  the  atonement,  disagree  with  them  in  others  no 
less  essential,  and  still  further  disagree  among  themselves  by 
all  the  differences  known  to  Lutheranism,  Calvinism,  Armin- 
ianism.     Then,  we  would  discover  that  the  Lutheran,  Calvin- 
istic,  and  Arminian  confessions,  though  largely  consentient 
as   to  the   chief  essential   doctrines  termed  evangelical,  are 
most  widely  dissentient  as  to  some  relatively  non-essential 
doctrines,  such  as  are  held  by  Episcopalians,  Presbyterians, 
and  Congregationalists.     And,  lastly  we  would  see  that  it  is 
precisely  some  one  of  these  non-essential  doctrines  which  each 
denomination  puts  in  the  front  as  its  standard,  claims  as  the 
source  of  its  life  and  the  only  reason  for  its  existence,  and 
often  cherishes  as  an  inherited  faith,  hallowed  by  the  blood 
of  martyrs  and  endeared  by  all  the  associations  of  home  and 
kindred.     In  a  word,  the  concords  of  American  creeds  would 
be  so  drowned  and  lost  in  their  discords  as  to  leave  us  hope- 
less of  anything  like  a  true  doctrinal  harmony. 

From  this  showing  of  the  case,  it  is  plain  that  the  utmost 


lo  The  United  CJmrches. 

we  can  hope  for  is  some  ultimate  consensus  which  cannot  now 
be  formulated  into  a  common  creed  of  the  churches,  but  must 
be  largely  matter  of  surmise  and  speculation.  We  may  as- 
sume, not  unreasonably,  that  it  will  exhibit  the  essential  faith 
in  distinction  from  the  non-essential,  and  exalt  the  great  things 
in  which  Christians  agree  above  the  small  things  in  which 
they  differ ;  and  we  may  expect,  on  good  grounds,  that  in  the 
course  of  its  evolution  some  dogmas  will  be  sloughed  off  as 
erroneous,  others  reduced  to  a  relative  importance,  and  still 
others  left  indifferent.  But  we  cannot  hope  to  see  it  start 
forth  at  one  blow  as  a  feat  of  logic  by  some  ambitious  peace- 
maker, or  even  carefully  wrought  out  as  a  piece  of  legislative 
wisdom  by  some  advanced  body  of  divines  met  to  adjust  the 
disputes  of  Christendom.  Rather  must  we  look  forward  to 
it  as  to  a  coming  survival  of  truth  over  error,  to  be  slowly 
evolved  from  the  present  conflict  of  opinion,  in  the  general 
progress  of  Christian  knowledge,  and  through  a  growing 
spirit  of  Christian  freedom,  charity,  tolerance,  and  catholicity. 
It  is  a  cheering  remark  of  Dr.  Schaff,  at  the  close  of  his 
survey  of  the  creeds  of  Christendom,  "  That  the  age  of  sepa- 
ration and  division  is  passing  away,  and  the  age  of  the  reunion 
of  a  divided  Christendom  is  beginning  to  dawn."  Glance  at 
some  of  the  grounds  of  this  inspiring  hope  here  in  our  coun- 
try. In  the  first  place,  we  should  not  overlook  the  doctrinal 
agreement  already  known  and  expressed,  such  as  the  consent 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  and  some  Protestant  churches  in  the 
Athanasian,  Nicene,  and  Apostles'  creeds;  the  consent  of  the 
Lutheran  and  Moravian  churches  in  the  Augsburg  confes- 
sion ;  the  consent  of  the  various  Episcopal  churches,  the  Prot- 
estant, the  Methodist,  the  Reformed,  in  the  Thirty-Nine 
Articles ;  the  consent  of  the  Congregational,  the  Baptist,  and 
the  various  Presbyterian  churches  in  the  Westminster  Stand- 
ards, together  with  the  indorsement  by  the  reunited  Presby- 
terian Church  of  the  Heidelberg  catechism  of  the  Dutch  and 
German  Reformed  churches.  In  the  second  place  we  may 
find  some  tendencies  to  a  doctrinal  agreement  between  these 


Agreements  in  Doctrine.  1 1 

different  groups  of  churches, — in  their  American  revisions  of 
these  various  standards  which  show,  now  and  then,  a  sHsrht 
though    unsought  mutual  approximation  ;    in  their  fraternal 
intercourse,  which  always  brings  into  view  a  large  latent  con- 
sent in  the  great  evangelical  doctrines  of  our  common  Chris- 
tianity ;  in  their  very  controversies,  which  often  serve  only  to 
show  how  trifling  is  their  dissensus  as  compared  with  their 
fundamental  consensus  ;  and  even  in  their  heretical  departures, 
which  sometimes    express  that  consensus  with  a   primitive 
simplicity  free   from    the  scholastic  technicality   of  the  old 
creeds,  whilst  their  pulpit  expositions  of  it  are  ever  setting  it 
forth  with    scriptural    freedom,  freshness  and  power.     And 
lastly,  we  may  everywhere   discern  the  signs  of  a  waning 
interest  in  the  mere  dogmatic  distinctions,  which  have  long 
hindered  the  growth  and  assertion  of  a  true  doctrinal  agree- 
ment,— such  as  the  decline  of  theological  controversy  in  the 
New  England  churches,  the  disappearance  of  the  old  and  new 
schools  in  the  reunited  Presbyterian  Church;  the  comprehen- 
sion of  doctrinal  differences  within  the  Episcopal  church,  and 
the  rise  of  Broad  Church  parties  in  other  churches  ;  the  spread 
of  open  communion  in  the  Baptist  churches  ;  the  liberty  of 
preaching  in  the  Methodist  church  ;  the  allowance  of  hereti- 
cal departures  in  many  churches  up  to  the  point  of  scandal; 
the   searching   revision  of  creeds    in    the    light  of    modern 
thought  and  science  ;  the  disuse  of  the  old  scholastic  cate- 
chisms, the  decay  of  polemic  preaching,  and  the  growing 
preference  for  evangelical  themes  of  a  moral  and  practical  pur- 
port.    Through  the  silent  action  of  such  causes,  it  may  yet 
happen  in  some  distant  future,  not  indeed  that  all  dogmas 
shall    be    obliterated,    but    subordinated   and    graduated    in 
harmony  with  the  one  universal  faith.     Even  now,  could  the 
American    churches,    leaving   their   existing   standards     un- 
changed, be  simply  confederated  in  a  formal  profession  of  the 
Nicene  or  Apostles'  Creed,^  in  which  most  of  them  might 


^  This  suggestion  was  published  two  years  before  the  Episcopal  Declarations 
at  Chicago  and  Lambeth,  proposing  these  two  creeds  as  doctrinal  bases  of 
Church  Unity. 


12 


TJie  United  CJmrches. 


readily  join,  their  denominational  dogmas  would  at  once  sink 
toward  a  proper  relative  value,  their  essential  consensus  would 
begin  to  emerge  into  view,  and  so  far  forth  they  would  appear 
to  the  world  as  the  United  Churches  of  the  United  States. 

Agreements  in  Polity. 

The  second  and  more  hopeful  ground  of  unity  is  that  of 
ecclesiastical  likeness  or  affinity  in  church  government.  The 
problem  is  no  longer  to  produce  agreement  as  to  the  whole 
mass  of  dogmas,  but  only  a  single  doctrine  or  set  of  doctrines 
of  minor  importance  except  when  made  by  some  extreme 
view  to  involve  other  more  essential  doctrines.  And  it  would 
seem  easier  to  secure  external  attachment  to  an  ecclesiastical 
polity  than  internal  unanimity  in  all  the  endless  points  of 
theological  science.  Experience  has  shown  that  Christians 
who  agree  in  scarcely  anything  else  may  hold  the  same  views 
of  church  government  and  even  dwell  together  in  the  same 
organization.  The  church  has  often  included  different  schools 
of  theology,  but  no  school  of  theology  ever  yet  included  the 
whole  church.  Indeed  it  is  a  common  reproach  of  Protes- 
tantism that  in  its  grand  effort  for  freedom  and  progress,  it 
has  given  birth  to  a  medley  of  jarring  sects,  by  exaggerating 
doctrinal  differences  which  had  been  allowed  and  adjusted 
within  the  pale  of  the  church  from  the  Apostles'  time  until  the 
Reformation.  And  that  such  outward  ecclesiastical  unity 
may  be  more  than  the  mere  enforced  uniformity  or  feigned 
conformity,  so  often  charged  against  State  churches,  might  be 
proved  by  examples  in  free  churches  where  no  political  re- 
straints have  been  imposed.  Even  conflicting  churches,  the 
most  unlike  in  their  dogmatic  standards,  Lutheran,  Calvinis- 
tic,  Arminian,  Socinian,  may  be  found  substantially  alike  in 
their  ecclesiastical  organization. 

In  order  to  bring  into  view  these  latent  affinities  of  the 
American  churches,  we  may  conveniently  group  them  in 
three  great  classes  according  to  their  structural  likeness  : 
First,  Congregational,  those  which  make  each  local  congre- 
gation self-governed  and  independent,  such  as  the  Baptist,  the 


Agreements  m  Polity.  13 

Unitarian,  and  the  Orthodox  churches;  Second,  Presbyterial, 
those  which  unite  con<^regations  under  presbyteries  composed 
of  representative  clergymen  and  laymen,  such  as  the  Lu- 
theran, the  Dutch  and  German  Reformed,  and  the  various 
Presbyterian  churches  ;  Third,  Episcopal,  those  which  subor- 
dinate both  congregations  and  presbyteries  to  bishops  as  a 
higher  order  of  clergymen,  such  as  the  Methodist,  the  Prot- 
estant, and  the  Reformed  Episcopal,  the  Moravian,  and  the 
Roman  Catholic  churches.  It  will  be  seen  at  a  glance  that 
these  three  classes  when  viewed  together,  present  a  scale 
rising  from  the  simplest  to  the  most  complex  forms  of  polity, 
and  on  closer  inspection  it  would  be  found  that  each  higher 
class  includes  the  lower  with  more  or  less  modification,  Pres- 
byterian churches  being  not  without  Congregational  ele- 
ments and  Episcopal  churches  being  not  without  Presbyterial 
elements. 

Nor  can  it  be  said  that  some  organic  union  of  these  more 
or  less  kindred  organizations  would  be  wholly  beyond  analogy 
and  precedent.  In  less  than  two  hundred  years  the  world  has 
seen  a  medley  of  incongruous  polities,  theocratic,  monarchic, 
democratic,  aristocratic,  grow  up  into  that  cluster  of  homo- 
geneous republics  known  as  the  United  States,  by  a  series  of 
transforming  events, — first  by  the  ascendancy  of  the  Protest- 
ant over  the  Catholic  powers  in  North  America,  then  by  the 
revolutionary  destruction  of  the  royal  and  proprietary  charters 
in  the  colonies,  and  at  last  by  a  vindicated  constitution  for- 
ever guaranteeing  the  freedom  of  states,  classes,  and  races. 
And  so  complete  a  political  metamorphosis  could  not  but 
affect  the  religious  bodies  which  have  been  more  or  less 
involved  in  it.  Freed  thereby  from  the  papal  supremacy,  from 
a  foreign  establishment,  and  from  all  connection  with  our  own 
government,  they  were  at  the  same  time  freed  from  the  causes 
which  once  drove  them  asunder,  and  brought  under  the 
causes  which  have  since  drawn  them  together.  Not  only  has 
each  group  of  kindred  churches  been  fraternizing  and  coal- 
escing ;    Congregational    with  Congregational ;    Presbyterial 


14  The  United  Chirches. 

with  Presbyterial ;  Episcopal  with  Episcopal ;  but  the  differ- 
ent groups  have  been  growing  like  each  other,  in  their  struc- 
ture as  well  as  in  their  aim  and  spirit.  Congregational 
churches,  no  longer  in  conflict  with  a  Presbyterian  parliament 
and  monarchy,  have  themselves  been  becoming  Presbyterial, 
with  their  series  of  representative  associations,  consociations, 
conferences,  and  councils,  and  their  facile  combination 
with  Presbyterian  bodies  in  fit  emergencies.  Presbyterial 
churches,  delivered  from  a  prelatical  peerage  as  well  as  from 
state  patronage,  have  been  allowing  Congregational  freedom 
in  their  parishes  and  adopting  Episcopal  elements  in  their 
overseeing  boards,  agencies,  and  secretaryships,  as  well  as 
becoming  pervaded  with  churchly  tendencies.  Episcopal 
churches,  freed  from  royal  control  and  left  wholly  self-de- 
pendent, have  been  admitting  Presbyterial  deputies,  clerical 
and  lay,  into  their  diocesan  conventions  and  standing  com- 
mittees, and  otherwise  curtailing  the  extraneous  powers  of 
the  episcopate  ;  whilst  some  churchmen  have  almost  stript  it 
of  doctrinal  significance  and  left  it  with  a  mere  expediential 
or  political  value,  as  a  sort  of  Episcopal  Presbyterianism  or 
so-called  Congregationalism  tinctured  with  Episcopacy.  Re- 
formed Episcopalians  interpret  the  Ordinal  in  the  sense  of  the 
early  Presbyterian  school  of  Archbishop  Usher,  Methodist 
Episcopalians  also  hold  to  an  Episcopacy  without  apostolic 
succession,  and  have  adopted  lay-representation  as  well  as  lay- 
preaching  in  their  administrative  policy.  The  Moravians 
practically  tend  to  a  kind  of  Presbyterian  Episcopacy.  Even 
the  Roman  Catholics,  at  the  late  Plenary  Council,  seem  to 
have  taken  the  first  step  toward  bringing  their  Episcopal  sys- 
tem into  formative  contact  with  republican  institutions.  At 
the  same  time  the  average  American  lay-man  has  a  growing 
dislike  of  hierarchical  orders  and  exclusive  pretensions. 
With  the  exception  of  the  Anglican  and  Roman  Catholic 
churchmen  who  claim  a  divine  right  and  special  grace  in  their 
own  ministry,  the  chief  Christian  bodies  have  been  fast  becom- 
ing congruous  in  polity  as  well  as  consentient  in  doctrine. 


Agreements  in  Worship.  15 

It  is  conceivable  that  these  assimilative  changes  may  go  on, 
together  with  lessening  dogmatic  differences,  until  all  exist- 
ing ecclesiastical  distinctions  shall  have  become  more  super- 
ficial than  fundamental,  more  nominal  than  real,  if  not  them- 
selves be  merged  in  some  comprehensive  polity  which  shall 
be  at  once  Congregational,  Presbyterial,  and  Episcopal,  and 
wherein  Protestant  freedom  and  intelligence  shall  appear  re- 
conciled with  Catholic  order  and  authority.  Already,  indeed, 
were  it  possible  for  the  leading  denominations  to  give  visible 
expression  to  their  own  hidden  structural  unity  by  acts  of 
mutual  recognition,  organic  connection,  and  cooperative  char- 
ity, like  the  scattered  bones  which  Ezekiel  saw  coming  to- 
gether into  a  great  army,  they  would  at  once  start  into  new 
life  and  activity  as  the  United  Churches  of  the  United  States, 
Hitherto  we  may  seem  to  have  been  investigating  grounds 
of  unity  which  are  obscure  and  only  lead  out  into  a  visionary 
future  ;  but  the  one  still  to  be  considered — liturgical  culture — 
belongs  to  our  own  time,  and  calls  for  practical  thought  and 

action. 

Agreements  in  Worship. 

It  would  seem  that  the  first  step  toward  true  church  unity 
must  be  liturgical  rather  than  doctrinal  or  strictly  ecclesiasti- 
cal. Christians  who  differ  cannot  begin  to  agree  until  they 
come  together  in  the  region  of  devout  feeling  and  are  thus 
predisposed  to  brotherly  concord.  Hence  it  was  amid  the 
Pentecostal  fervors  in  the  early  church  that  all  divisions  of 
race,  language,  lineage,  sect  and  party  became  for  the  time 
effaced,  and  ever  since  then  it  has  been  found  that  in  the  fire 
of  true  devotion  the  sternest  sectarian  feuds  melt  away  and 
are  forgotten.  People  of  all  creeds,  Calvinists,  Arminians, 
Episcopalians,  Presbyterians,  Baptists,  Methodists,  can  and  do 
unite  in  performing  the  same  acts  of  worship,  in  observing 
the  same  sacraments,  and  in  commemorating  the  same  relig- 
ious events.  And  such  devotions  are  not  confined  to  times 
and  scenes  of  revival  excitement.  When  they  have  become 
expressed  liturgically  in  time-hallowed  hymns  and   prayers 


1 6  The  United  Churches. 

which  breathe  the  common  Christian  heart  of  all  ages,  in  sig- 
nificant rites  and  emblems  which  set  forth  the  essential  Chris- 
tian faith  in  all  churches,  and  in  annual  festivals  which  thrill 
the  whole  Christian  world  with  the  consciousness  of  great 
Christian  facts  and  doctrines,  there  is  then  afforded  a  perma- 
nent practical  communion  of  saints  between  different  denom- 
inations. 

It  is  such  a  liturgical  fusion  that  has  long  been  going  on 
amongst  us,  hidden  and  unnoticed.  The  great  historical 
churches,  whose  doctrinal  standards  have  remained  fixed  for 
generations  and  whose  ecclesiastical  bounds  are  still  jealously 
guarded,  have  meanwhile  been  so  modifying  their  service-, 
books  and  insensibly  so  interchanging  their  modes  of  worship 
that  now,  with  scarce  a  thought  of  any  incongruity.  Catholic 
creeds  are  recited  in  Protestant  assemblies,  Anglican  rites  are 
couched  in  Lutheran  forms,  Presbyterian  prayers  are  intoned 
by  Episcopalian  priests,  Wesleyan  hymns  are  sung  after  Cal- 
vinistic  sermons,  portions  of  High  Mass  are  chanted  by  Cov- 
enanter choirs,  and  Puritan  meeting-houses  are  decked  with 
Christmas  evergreens  and  Easter  flowers.  It  is  in  fact  no 
longer  possible  to  ignore  a  deep  and  wide-spread  liturgical 
movement  pervading  the  leading  denominations  like  a  ground- 
swell  and  threatening  some  day  to  upheave  and  bury  out  of 
sight  the  sectarian  differences  in  which  the  popular  mind  has 
ceased  to  take  interest.  The  general  demand,  as  we  are  often 
told  by  the  secular  press,  is  for  more  of  Christian  life  and 
worship  and  less  of  a  mere  metaphysical  theology.  The 
people,  not  content  with  having  the  choicest  literature  and 
oratory  in  the  sermon,  are  calling  for  the  aids  of  music  and 
architecture  in  the  service  and  secretly  revolting  from  a  mode 
of  worship  in  which  a  theological  lecture  is  the  one  all- 
absorbing  feature  and  by  which  feeling  has  been  divorced 
from  expression,  devotion  from  art,  and  doctrine  from  every 
day  life.  In  some  denominations,  as  in  the  Lutheran,  the 
Dutch  and  German  Reformed,  the  Presbyterian  and  the 
Methodist,  their  own  defunct  liturgies  have  been  restored  or 


Agreements  in  Woi''ship.  17 

republished  and  brought  into  discussion,  whilst  in  others 
attempts  are  made  to  construct  new  formularies,  without  re- 
gard to  antiquity,  catholicity  or  authority.  At  the  same  time, 
the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  has  been  reaping  a  harvest 
of  conversions  not  likely  to  have  been  made  upon  strictly 
dogmatic  grounds,  and  is  itself  already  engaged  in  the  timely 
work  of  enriching  the  prayer-book  and  adapting  it  to  Ameri- 
can life  and  institutions. 

It  would  be  a  great  mistake  to  think  this  whole  movement 
due  to  the  clergy  alone,  or  even  confined  to  the  educated  and 
fashionable  classes.  In  some  churches  the  people  have  been 
acquiring  the  liturgical  culture  which  once  belonged  only  to 
the  priest  and  choir,  and  can  say  or  sing  in  English  the 
Gloria,  Te  Deum,  etc.,  whose  Latin  titles  show  their  origin. 
Where  such  culture  is  not  found,  the  plainest  and  rudest, 
gathered  in  slums  or  in  the  backwoods,  seem  glad  to  become 
active  worshipers  instead  of  mere  passive  listeners,  and  to 
have  their  devotion  enkindled  through  the  senses  as  well  as 
the  intellect  and  conscience.  And  as  if  to  insure  such  a  cul- 
ture in  the  future,  the  whole  rising  generation  in  our  Sunday- 
schools  is  being  trained  into  a  liturgical  habit  by  a  crude 
lectionary,  responsive  psalter,  recited  prayers,  and  often  all 
the  appliances  of  a  dramatic  ritual. 

Even  those  who  do  not  sympathize  with  the  movement 
have  ceased  to  deride  it,  and  exchanging  indifference  for 
grave  astonishment  at  its  portentous  bearing,  are  casting 
about  for  means  of  explanation  and  resistance.  By  many  of 
them  it  will  no  doubt  be  summarily  set  down  to  the  account 
of  our  original  depravity,  as  due  to  a  general  decline  of  vital 
rehgion,  or  to  the  increase  of  wealth,  luxury,  and  fashion,  or 
to  the  demoralizing  influences  of  a  civil  war,  or  to  some 
merely  temporary  excess  or  aberration  of  modern  civilization. 
After  duly  allowing  for  such  causes,  however,  we  may  still 
accept  the  new  development  as  a  necessary,  and  in  the  main 
a  sound  reaction  of  the  Protestant  mind  from  an  extreme  into 
which  it  was  driven  under  the  impulse  of  the  Reformation, — 


1 8  The  United  Churches. 

an  extreme  which  was  unavoidable  in  so  great  a  religious 
revolution,  and  which  was  needed  at  the  time  for  the  purifica- 
tion of  European  Christianity  and  for  the  colonization  of  the 
American  churches,  but  which,  now  that  those  great  ends 
have  been  attained,  may  well  give  place  to  some  more  mod- 
erate and  reasonable  course.  In  other  words,  it  would  seem 
the  true  policy  neither  to  ignore  nor  to  oppose  this  reaction- 
ary tendency,  but  to  candidly  recognize  what  is  true  and  valu- 
able in  it,  to  indicate  its  needed  checks  and  safeguards,  and 
to  provide  for  its  legitimate  gratification.  We  need  not  re- 
nounce existing  Protestantism  as  a  failure  ;  we  cannot  accept 
existing  Catholicism  as  a  success  ;  but  surely  we  may  look 
somewhere  between  these  extremes  for  the  path  of  wisdom 

and  safety. 

Revivalism  and  Ritualism. 

On  surveying  the  present  state  of  religious  culture  we  shall 
find  two  conflicting  theories  of  worship,  in  neither  of  which 
exclusively  is  the  great  body  of  Christian  people  likely  to 
abide.  The  one,  for  want  of  a  better  word,  has  been  called 
revivalism  ;  the  other  is  known  as  ritualism.  The  one  would 
take  exalted  religious  sentiment  amounting  to  rapture  as  the 
normal  state  of  every  worshiping  congregation ;  the  other 
aims  at  the  outward  expression  of  religious  sentiment  in  a 
ceremonial  and  artistic  form,  with  the  view  of  impressing  the 
mind  through  the  imagination  and  the  senses.  The  most 
perfect  example  of  revivalism,  that  to  which  it  constantly 
appeals  for  its  warrant,  was  the  rapt  assembly  at  Pentecost, 
with  its  many-tongued  psalmists  and  inspired  prophets,  its 
transports  and  fervors  and  miraculous  conversions.  The 
typical  illustration  of  ritualism,  and  that  to  which  it  naturally 
reverts  for  its  model,  was  the  mediaeval  cathedral,  with  its 
supposed  re-enactment  of  the  great  tragedy  of  the  Cross, 
amid  all  the  aesthetical  influences  of  architecture,  sculpture, 
painting,  music,  and  eloquence.  Whilst  the  affinities  of  re- 
vivalism are  with  new  and  rude  populations,  which  have 
neither  the  means  nor  the  taste  for  literary  and  artistic  modes 


Revivalism  and  Ritualism,  19 

of  worship,  the  tendencies  to  ritualism  are  found  in  older  and 
richer  communities,  whose  culture  and  art  must  sooner  or 
later  permeate  their  religious  as  well  as  domestic  and  social 
life. 

Now,  it  is  enough  thus  to  fairly  state  the  two  theories  in 
order  to  see  that  neither  can  hope  to  exterminate  its  oppo- 
site, or  arrogate  to  itself  the  whole  truth  in  respect  to  the 
vital  matter  of  Christian  worship.  Too  often  their  respective 
advocates  have  proceeded  upon  such  assumption,  until  they 
have  simply  become  incapable  of  appreciating  each  other. 
The  mere  revivalist  has  ended  in  decrying  all  artistic  culture 
as  essentially  irreligious,  and  conceiving  it  to  be  impossible 
for  refined  and  fashionable  people  to  be  as  good  Christians  as 
himself,  whilst  the  mere  ritualist  has  at  length  reduced  his 
whole  religion  to  a  fine  art,  and  learned  to  look  upon  all  other 
manifestations  of  religious  feeling  as  vulgar  rant  and  hypoc- 
risy. But  the  history  of  Christianity  shows  that  neither 
tendency  can  be  safely  pushed  to  an  extreme.  Even  in  the 
primitive  church  the  revival  spirit,  with  all  the  advantage  of 
miraculous  gifts,  gave  rise  to  so  shocking  abuses  that  the 
Apostles  enjoined  a  more  decorous  and  formal  mode  of 
worship,  and  often  since  then,  when  not  wisely  checked  and 
guided,  it  has  fostered  a  spasmodic  type  of  piety,  consisting 
of  nervous  exaltations,  followed  by  dreary  collapses,  destruc- 
tive of  all  normal  church  growth  and  healthy  Christian  activ- 
ity. In  like  manner  the  ritualistic  spirit  very  soon  began  to 
harden  the  simple  usages  of  primitive  worship  into  an  elabo- 
rate ceremonial  to  which  all  the  arts  contributed,  until  the 
church  became  a  temple  of  the  Christian  Muses  ;  and  in  our 
day  even  that  earnest  expression  of  a  once  living  belief  has 
sometimes  given  place  to  a  mere  scenic  symbolism  akin  in 
effect  to  the  spectacular  drama. 

At  the  same  time  notwithstanding  these  extremes,  the  essen- 
tial good  that  is  in  each  tendency  is  still  apparent.  It  would 
be  folly  to  treat  as  mere  morbid  excitement  such  a  great 
religious  awakening  as  that  which  attended  the  preaching  of 


20  The  United  Churches. 

Whitefield  and  Wesley,  when  like  new  apostles  they  traversed 
the  American  colonies,  kindling  them  into  a  flame  of  devotion  ; 
and  on  the  other  hand  it  would  be  almost  an  insult  to  argue 
that  liturgies  foster  a  low  type  of  Christian  faith  and  practice, 
in  view  of  so  illustrious  examples  as  Bernard,  Herbert,  Taylor, 
and  Keble.  In  our  own  time  much  of  the  earnest  working 
Christianity  of  the  Church  of  England  has  gone  into  the 
ritualistic  party,  and  in  our  own  country  a  high  order  of  litur- 
gical service  may  be  found  associated  not  only  with  faithful 
pulpits,  but  with  city  charities  and  frontier  missions.  Even 
the  evangelists.  Moody  and  Sankey,  resort  to  a  kind  of  crude 
ritualism  in  their  revival  meetings,  whilst  the  ritualist  Fathers 
Maturin  and  Knox-Little  tincture  their  ritual  with  a  kind  of 
mild  revivalism.  The  simple  truth  is  that  both  tendencies  are 
legitimate  and  valuable  within  the  limits  which  they  impose 
upon  each  other.  There  are  churches,  especially  those  still 
doing  pioneer  work,  in  which  revival  methods  must  long  pre- 
vail ;  and  there  may  be  times  in  the  history  of  all  churches 
when  such  methods  will  be  needed  to  refresh  their  languid 
faith,  and  quicken  them  into  new  life  ;  but  for  the  ordinary 
sound  states  of  feeling  in  churches  becoming  replenished  with 
learning  and  culture,  the  need  of  a  more  or  less  literary  and 
artistic  form  of  worship  presents  itself  as  a  foregone  conclu- 
sion for  which  due  provision  should  be  made. 

The  Claims  of  yEsTHExicisM. 

It  will  be  easy  at  this  point  to  sneer  at  literary  and  artistic 
tastes  as  weak  and  trivial  compared  with  religious  interests. 
That  is  not  the  question  :  that  may  be  granted.  Nevertheless 
the  faculties  used  in  the  cultivation  of  letters  and  the  fine  arts, 
small  as  they  may  be,  are  an  original  part  of  human  nature  and 
essential  to  a  fully  developed  manhood.  Unless  they  be 
simply  obliterated,  they  must  somehow  share  in  the  regenera- 
tive power  of  the  Christian  faith,  and  find  their  due  place  in 
any  symmetrical  scheme  of  Christian  nurture.  Neglect  them 
or  train  them  apart  from  religious  ideas  and  influences,  and 


The  Claims  of  ^stheticism.  2 1 

sooner  or  later  they  will  ally  themselves  with  vice  and  super- 
stition, and  at  length  appear  in  some  terrible  Nemesis  of  faith 
like  that  which  avenged  the  Puritan  rigor  with  the  licentious 
reign  of  Charles  II.  Moreover,  it  has  become  a  practical 
question  how  to  deal  with  them.  The  culture  which  has 
invaded  our  homes  cannot  be  kept  out  of  our  churches.  In 
fact  it  has  already  come  into  them,  and  come  to  stay.  If  we 
will  not  go  back  to  the  Puritan  meeting-house,  the  Covenanter 
psalm-singing,  the  Methodist  camp-meeting,  the  Quaker 
silence,  we  must  go  forward  to  some  new  adjustment  of  the 
advanced  civilization  and  Christianity  of  our  day. 

Precisely  what  that  adjustment  should  be,  how  far  the  con- 
temporaneous literature  and  art  of  a  community  can  be  wisely 
admitted  within  the  sphere  of  Christian  worship,  it  might  not 
be  easy  to  decide  as  an  abstract  question.  Practically,  how- 
ever, as  we  have  seen,  it  is  being  settled  for  us  by  the  course 
of  providential  events,  by  the  spontaneous  working  and  inter- 
action of  the  two  interests.  The  much-dreaded  corruption  of 
religion  by  science,  of  piety  by  art,  of  devotion  by  taste,  has 
not  come  to  pass.  Allowing  for  exceptions  we  may  fearlessly 
claim  just  the  opposite  result.  Pulpits  as  orthodox  and  stead- 
fast as  any  of  the  last  generation  are  to-day  reinforced  with  all 
the  stores  of  modern  literature,  and  applying  Scripture  doc- 
trine, as  never  before,  to  current  questions  in  trade,  morals, 
politics,  and  philosophy.  Congregations  as  devout  and  earnest 
as  any  once  gathered  in  the  barn-like  chapel  or  imitated 
Greek  temple,  are  now  worshipping  in  Christian  buildings, 
amid  Christian  emblems  and  legends,  and  with  the  aid  of 
choir  and  organ  offering  up  the  glorias  and  canticles  of  a  Chris- 
tian ritual.  In  short,  churches  which  have  been  longest  on 
the  soil  and  most  fairly  express  our  national  life  and  social 
growth,  without  any  loss  of  their  early  purity  and  zeal,  and 
without  the  least  compromise  of  their  distinctive  orthodoxy, 
are  adopting  all  the  elements  of  liturgical  worship. 


22 


The  United  Churches. 


New-made  Liturgies. 

Leaving  it  to  appear  hereafter,  how  much  of  this  movement 
is  crude  and  rash  and  likely  to  pass  away,  we  come  at  once  to 
the  practical  questions — How  is  it  to  be  met  and  satisfied  ? 
Whereto  does  it  tend  ?  And  to  the  former  question  the 
answer  is  plain,  that  it  cannot  be  met  and  satisfied  by  new- 
made  liturgies  or  patchwork  services.  Such  expedients  pro- 
ceed upon  a  misconception  of  the  true  liturgic  ideal  as  an 
historical  growth  and  flower  of  the  piety  of  the  whole  church 
in  all  lands  and  ages.  In  distinction  from  extemporaneous 
worship,  a  liturgy  is  a  system,  for  both  minister  and  people,  of 
fixed  forms  of  prayer  and  praise,  of  administering  rites  and 
ceremonies,  of  methodically  reading  the  Holy  Scriptures,  of 
commemorating  events  and  doctrines,  together  with  any 
literary  and  artistic  aids  which  may  be  afforded  by  the  exist- 
ing state  of  religious  culture.  Such  a  system  cannot  be  made 
by  one  man,  in  a  day.  To  attempt  it  would  be  to  set  at  nought 
the  wisdom  of  eighteen  centuries  of  Christian  worship.  It 
would  be  the  absurdity  of  composing  new  hymns  as  well  as 
prayers,  of  framing  new  creeds,  of  celebrating  the  Lord's 
Supper,  baptism,  matrimony  and  burial  with  new  ceremonies, 
of  constructing  tables  of  Scripture  lessons,  which  have  never 
been  tested,  and  of  instituting  Christian  festivals  of  which  the 
church  has  never  heard.  It  is  something  like  this  absurdity 
which  is  perpetrated  whenever  a  liturgy-maker  sits  down  in  his 
study  to  write  out  an  original  and  complete  formulary  for  the 
use  of  his  people  or  of  his  denomination,  in  ignorance  and 
sometimes  in  contempt  of  the  devotional  treasures  which 
have  been  accumulating  for  ages. 

And  scarcely  any  better  is  the  incongruous  mixture  some- 
times made  of  liturgical  with  extemporaneous  worship.  Each 
is  good  in  its  own  place,  and  either  in  place  is  better  than  the 
other  out  of  place.  In  social  prayer-meetings,  especially 
during  times  of  revival,  the  prayers,  hymns,  and  exhortations 
will  be   free  and  spontaneous,  and  anything  like  a  liturgy 


New-77iade  LitiLvgics.  23 

would  be  felt  as  an  intolerable  bondage,  but  in  large  assem- 
blies on  public  occasions  there  must  be  more  of  method  and 
formality.  It  would  seem  a  strange  impropriety,  when  we 
think  of  it,  to  improvise  stated,  ordinary  acts  of  divine  service, 
to  extemporize  the  administration  of  solemn  rites,  to  express 
the  moods  and  wants  of  but  one  individual  out  of  a  thousand 
people  and  often  leave  their  most  essential  devotions  to  his 
chance  impulse.  And  yet  something  very  much  like  this 
will  be  endured  by  intelligent  congregations  who  have  taken 
steps  to  formulize  their  worship  in  some  respects  but  not  in 
others ;  who  will  come  together  for  impromptu  services  in  a 
cathedral-like  structure  adapted  to  ritual  uses ;  who  will  insist 
upon  a  carefully  written  sermon,  but  sit  listless  through  long 
desultory  prayers ;  who  will  let  their  children  read  the  same 
appointed  Scripture  lesson  with  all  the  Sunday-schools  in 
Christendom,  but  have  their  own  public  reading  of  God's 
word  arranged,  if  arranged  at  all,  on  some  occult  principle 
known  to  the  minister  alone ;  who  will  grope  after  him  through 
a  service  supposed  to  be  introductory  to  the  unknown  theme 
of  his  sermon ;  who  will  only  join  him  intelligently  in  saying 
a  Psalter  which  was  meant  to  be  sung,  or  have  his  unpre- 
meditated effusions  mixed  with  a  i<t\N  liturgical  forms,  such  as 
the  Lord's  Prayer,  the  Apostles'  Creed,  the  Commandments, 
the  Glorias,  torn  piecemeal  from  their  only  proper  liturgical 
connection ;  who  will  keep  anniversary  days  and  weeks  of 
prayer  by  human  appointment,  but  discard  the  observance  of 
Lent  as  without  divine  warrant,  or  perhaps  celebrate  Christ- 
mas, Good  Friday,  and  Easter  as  mere  public  or  social  inci- 
dents, without  regard  to  the  Christian  year  in  which  they  find 
their  true  significance ;  in  a  word,  who  will  seek  to  blend 
fragments  of  the  ancient  liturgy  with  an  otherwise  informal 
service.  The  wonder  is  that  the  two  can  live  together,  and 
it  would  seem  certain  that  sooner  or  later  one  or  the  other 
will  have  to  be  abandoned. 

This  brings   us  to  the  other  practical  question  as  to  the 
issue  of  the  liturgical  movement,  and  the  answer  is  already  at 


24  The  United  Churches. 

hand: — it  must  have  its  logical  conclusion  in  the  English 
prayer-book  as  the  only  Christian  liturgy  worthy  of  the  name. 
I  do  not  forget  the  Lutheran,  Dutch  and  German  Reformed 
and  early  Presbyterian  formularies,  each  admirable  in  its  own 
day  and  for  its  own  purpose  ;  and  were  it  at  all  likely  that  any 
of  them  could  now  come  into  general  use  among  our  churches 
it  might  be  well  to  pause  and  estimate  their  claims.  But  on 
their  face  it  will  be  seen  that,  being  of  foreign  origin  and 
modern  translation,  they  are  wanting  in  the  quaint  classical 
English  of  the  age  of  Shakespeare,  as  well  as  in  that  solemn 
Scriptural  style  which  is  so  desirable  in  order  to  separate  the 
phrase  of  public  worship  from  that  of  ordinary  literature  and 
conversation.  Moreover,  in  their  structure  it  will  be  found 
that  they  break  more  entirely  with  Christian  antiquity  than 
would  now  be  deemed  desirable,  whilst  their  own  contents, 
as  we  shall  see,  have  been  largely  included  in  the  prayer- 
book  compilation,  together  with  other  forms  of  still  greater 
liturgical  value. 

Let  it  be  here  premised  that  by  the  English  prayer-book 
in  this  essay  is  meant  the  liturgy  of  the  Church  of  England 
as  it  has  existed  substantially  for  more  than  three  hundred 
years,  long  before  any  other  American  churches  had  come 
into  being;  and  that  liturgy  chiefly  in  distinction  from  the 
Articles  and  the  Ordinal,  with  neither  of  which  isit  indissolu- 
bly  connected,  as  is  shown,  not  only  by  their  separate  origin 
and  use,  but  also  by  the  existence  of  other  versions  repre- 
senting other  views  of  doctrine  and  polity,  Calvinistic, 
Arminian,  Socinian,  Presbyterian,  Methodist,  and  Congrega- 
tional. For  the  main  purpose  of  this  argument  the  Protes- 
tant Episcopal  edition,  with  which  we  are  happily  so  familiar, 
need  not  be  taken  specially  into  account,  but  our  attention 
simply  fixed  upon  that  ancient  service,  whose  structure  and 
contents  have  remained  essentially  the  same  through  all  the 
revisions  to  which  it  has  been  subjected  and  amid  all  the  varie- 
ties in  which  it  is  still  extant. 


ExcelleJice  of  the  English  Litiwgy.  25 

Excellence  of  the  English  Liturgy. 

The  English  liturgy,  next  to  the  English  Bible,  is  the  most 
wonderful  product  of  the  Reformation.  The  very  fortunes  of 
the  book  are  the  romance  of  history.  As  we  trace  its  de- 
velopment, its  rubrics  seem  dyed  in  the  blood  of  martyrs ; 
its  offices  echo  with  polemic  phrases ;  its  canticles  mingle 
with  the  battle-cries  of  armed  sects  and  factions  ;  and  its  suc- 
cessive revisions  mark  the  career  of  dynasties,  states,  and 
churches.  Cavalier,  covenanter,  and  puritan  have  crossed  their 
swords  over  it ;  scholars  and  soldiers,  statesmen  and  church- 
men, kings  and  commoners,  have  united  in  defending  it. 
England,  Germany,  Geneva,  Scotland,  America,  have  by  turns 
been  the  scene  of  its  conflicts.  Far  beyond  the  little  island 
which  was  its  birthplace,  its  influence  has  been  silently 
spreading  in  connection  with  great  political  and  religious 
changes,  generation  after  generation,  from  land  to  land,  even 
where  its  name  was  never  heard. 

At  first  sight,  indeed,  the  importance  which  this  book  has 
acquired  may  seem  quite  beyond  its  merits,  as  the  Bible 
itself  might  appear  to  a  superficial  observer  a  mere  idol  of 
bigotry  and  prejudice.  But  the  explanation  is  in  both  cases 
somewhat  the  same.  It  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the 
prayer-book,  like  the  sacred  canon,  is  no  merely  individual 
production,  nor"  even  purely  human  work,  but  an  accumula- 
tion of  choice  writings,  partly  divine,  partly  human,  expres- 
sing the  religious  mind  of  the  whole  ancient  and  modern 
world,  as  enunciated  by  prophets  and  apostles,  saints  and 
martyrs,  and  formulated  by  councils,  synods,  and  conferences, 
all  seeking  heavenly  light  and  guidance.  Judaism  has  given 
to  it  its  lessons  and  psalter;  Christianity  has  added  its  epistles 
and  gospels;  Catholicism  has  followed  with  its  canticles, 
creeds,  and  collects ;  and  Protestantism  has  completed  it  with 
its  exhortations,  confessions,  and  thanksgivings.  At  the  same 
time  each  leading  phase  of  the  reformation  has  been  impressed 
upon  its  composite  materials.     Lutheranism  has  molded  its 


26  The  United  Churches. 

ritual ;  Calvinism  has  framed  its  doctrine ;  Episcopalianism 
has  dominated  both  ritual  and  doctrine ;  whilst  Presbyterianism 
has  subjected  each  to  thorough  revision.  And  the  whole  has 
been  rendered  into  the  pure  English  and  with  the  sacred 
fervor  peculiar  to  the  earnest  age  in  which  it  arose ;  has  been 
wrought  into  a  system  adapted  to  all  classes  of  men  through 
all  the  vicissitudes  of  life ;  and  has  been  tested  and  hallowed 
by  three  centuries  of  trial  in  every  quarter  of  the  globe. 

Catholicity  of  the  English  Liturgy. 

It  would  be  strange  if  a  work  which  thus  has  its  roots  in 
the  whole  church  of  the  past  should  not  be  sending  forth  its 
branches  into  the  whole  church  of  the  future ;  and  any  one 
who  will  take  the  pains  to  study  its  present  adaptations, 
whatever  may  have  been  his  prejudices,  must  admit  that  there 
is  no  other  extant  formulary  which  is  so  well  fitted  to  become 
the  rallying-point  and  standard  of  modern  Christendom.  In 
it  are  to  be  found  the  means,  possibly  the  germs,  of  a  just 
reorganization  of  Protestantism  as  well  as  an  ultimate  recon- 
ciliation  with  true  Catholicism,  such  a  Catholicism  as  shall 
have  shed  everything  sectarian  and  national,  and  retained 
only  what  is  common  to  the  whole  Church  of  Christ  in  all 
ages  and  countries.  Whilst  to  the  true  Protestant  it  offers 
evangelical  doctrine,  worship,  and  unity  on  the  terms  of  the 
Reformation,  it  still  preserves  for  the  true  Catholic  the 
choicest  formulas  of  antiquity,  and  to  all  Christians  of  every 
name  opens  a  liturgical  system  at  once  Scriptural  and  reason- 
able, doctrinal  and  devotional,  learned  and  vernacular,  artis- 
tic and  spiritual.  It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  were  the 
problem  given,  to  frame  out  of  the  imperfectly  organized  and 
sectarian  Christianity  of  our  times  a  liturgical  model  for  the 
communion  of  saints  in  the  one  universal  church,  the  result 
might  be  expressed  in  some  such  compilation  as  the  English 
Book  of  Common  Prayer, 

This  ideal  fitness  of  the  work  to  serve  as  the  nucleus  of  a 
reunited  Christianity  will  especially  appear  in  the  American 


Catholicity  of  the  English  Liturgy.  27 

churches,  if  we  view  it  in  connection  with  their  historical 
origin  and  their  present  condition.  In  the  first  place,  it  sus- 
tains historical  relations  to  those  churches,  which  though 
forgotten  or  obscured,  are  vital  and  enduring.  Owing  to  the 
mode  of  its  compilation  from  other  liturgies,  the  very  mate- 
rials out  of  which  it  was  at  first  formed  have  an  organic 
affinity  for  the  various  ecclesiastical  elements  which  now  lie 
around  it  in  this  country  as  disjecta  membra,  as  yet  unassimi- 
lated  and  discordant.  Whilst  its  Catholic  or  ancient  portions, 
derived  from  the  Greek  and  Latin  churches,  maybe  regarded 
as  the  common  heritage  of  all  Christians,  its  Protestant  por- 
tions can  be  traced  back  to  their  sources  in  those  Reformed 
churches  of  Germany,  Geneva,  Holland,  Scotland,  and  Eng- 
land in  which  the  American  churches  have  severally  originated ; 
and  were  they  now  disposed  to  any  formal  correspondence  or 
union,  they  would  only  have  to  come  together  in  the  light  of 
their  common  history  in  order  to  see  that  the  English  prayer- 
book,  next  to  the  Holy  Scriptures,  affords  the  closest  visible 
bonds  between  them.  The  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church, 
besides  recognizing  in  it  some  of  the  ancient  Catholic  formu- 
las which  she  has  also  retained,  could  find  in  the  offices  of 
baptism,  matrimony,  and  burial  large  portions  of  the  liturgies 
of  Luther,  Melancthon,  and  Bucer.  The  Reformed  churches 
(Dutch  and  German)  could  refer  important  parts  of  the  daily 
prayer  and  communion  service  to  a  common  origin  with  their 
own  liturgies  in  the  formularies  of  Calvin,  Lasco,  and  Pol- 
lanus.  The  Presbyterian  church,  whose  standards  were 
framed  mainly  by  presbyters  of  the  Church  of  England  in 
the  Westminster  Assembly,  could  not  only  discern  in  the 
articles  of  religion  the  original  skeleton  of  her  confession  of 
faith,  but  trace  through  the  entire  liturgy  her  revising  hand, 
and  might  regain  a  living  embodiment  of  her  directory  of 
worship  in  that  amended  prayer-book  which  some  of  her  own 
founders  strove  to  establish  two  centuries  ago.  The  Protest- 
ant Episcopal  church,  the  only  church  that  has  faithfully  kept 
and  honored  the  whole  book  among  us,  after  guarding  her 


2  8  The  United  Churches, 

connection  with  the  Anglican,  Latin,  and  Greek  churches, 
might  also  acknowledge  her  large  indebtedness  to  other 
Protestant  churches,  now  in  a  position,  as  never  before,  to 
recognize  and  respect  their  mutual  relationship.  The  Metho- 
dist Episcopal  church,  which  herself  originated  in  an  Oxford 
movement,  besides  deriving  the  model  of  her  polity  from  the 
Ordinal,  still  retains  the  prayer-book  as  edited  and  authorized 
by  Wesley.  Even  the  Congregational  churches  (Trinitarian, 
Unitarian,  Baptist),  though  without  the  same  historical  con- 
tinuity, might  look  for  broken  hnks  in  the  Westminster  cate- 
chisms and  King's  Chapel  prayer-book,  as  well  as  in  the  early 
Puritan  revisions  before  the  rise  of  Independency.  In  fact, 
nearly  all  the  leading  denominations,  were  they  to  retrace  their 
history,  would  come  back  to  the  English  liturgy  as  a  work 
which  their  ecclesiastical  forefathers  did  not  so  much  aim  to 
destroy  as  to  amend ;  which  they  finally  abandoned  only  in 
the  larger  interests  of  civil  and  religious  freedom  ;  and  which 
they  m.ight  now,  in  the  changed  circumstances  of  another  age 
and  country,  easily  resume  and  modify  without  the  least  sacri- 
fice of  denominational  pride  or  logical  consistency. 

Reaction  Toward  the  English  Liturgy. 
If  this  picture  seem  strange  and  visionary,  let  it  be  ob- 
served in  the  second  place,  that  the  American  churches  for 
some  time  past  have  been  steadily,  though  unconsciously, 
drifting  back  toward  the  midway  position  held  by  the  English 
prayer-book  between  the  extremes  of  Catholic  and  Protestant 
Christianity.  Whilst  the  European  churches,  Roman,  Angli- 
can, Scotch,  Dutch,  German,  have  for  several  centuries  re- 
mained fixed  in  their  original  seats  as  state  religions,  with 
but  little  intercourse  and  mutual  modification,  the  American 
churches  meanwhile,  escaping  from  these  narrow  confines, 
have  migrated  to  another  hemisphere,  become  compacted  to- 
gether under  a  republican  form  of  government,  made  free  and 
equal  before  the  law,  and  left  to  their  own  spontaneous  devel- 
opment.    The  result  is  that  they  have  been  slowly  rebound- 


Reaction  Tozuard  the  English  Liturgy.  29 

ing  from  the  rash  extremes  into  which  they  were  driven  by 
sectarian  warfare  in  the  Old  World,  and  no  longer  held  apart 
by  political  restraints,  are  now  under  common  impulses  tend- 
ing toward  substantial  unity  in  the  midst  of  trivial  diversity. 
In  matters  of  order  and  worship  here  and  there,  they  have 
actually  exchanged  positions  in  their  recoil,  and  come  nearer 
to  each  other  than  to  their  respective  mother  churches  on  the 
other  side  of  the  Atlantic.  Presbyterians  have  been  adopting 
the  liturgical  usages  which  once  kindled  the  wrath  of  Jenny 
Geddes  into  a  revolution  of  the  three  kingdoms,  whilst  Epis- 
copalians have  been  admitting  the  lay  elements  which  brought 
Archbishop  Laud  to  the  scaffold.  Congregationalists  are  re- 
producing the  church  buildings  which  their  ancestors  defaced 
as  Popish  chapels,  whilst  American  churchmen  are  proposing 
to  make  the  old  Puritan  Thanksgiving  a  holy  day  in  the 
Church  year.  Baptist  ministers  have  begun  to  borrow  from 
a  prayer-book  which  John  Bunyan  renounced  for  the  Elstow 
jail,  whilst  neighboring  rectors  have  engaged  in  prayer-meet- 
ings which  the  bishops  of  that  day  would  have  legally  sup- 
pressed as  a  crime.  Methodist  congregations,  founded  by 
John  Weslej'',  have  costly  churches,  service-books,  and  writ- 
ten sermons,  whilst  the  Oxford  reformers  of  to-day  have  sur- 
pliced  lay-readers,  clerical  exhorters,  and  ritual  missions. 
Not  long  since  an  association  of  city  ministers  devised  a 
"non-Episcopal  observance  of  Lent,"  whilst  Lenten  revivals 
were  being  conducted  by  a  Protestant  order  of  priests.  The 
whole  Christian  world  is  alive  with  such  changes,  and  becom- 
ing visibly  marshaled  for  the  issue.  On  the  one  side  are  the 
various  Protestant  churches,  already  beginning  to  resume 
those  portions  of  the  prayer-book  which  were  once  falsely 
associated  with  tyranny  and  superstition,  and  in  spite  of  in- 
herited prejudices,  exploring  anew  the  whole  field  of  Catholic 
antiquity ;  and  it  would  be  strange  indeed,  if  these  enlight- 
ened Christian  bodies,  thus  moving  in  the  line  of  great 
historical  causes,  should  pause  in  the  midst  of  so  inevitable  re- 
actions.    On   the  other  side  are  the  Roman  and  Anglican 


30  The  United  CJmrches. 

churches,  no  longer  able  to  bind  up  the  Catholic  portions  of 
the  prayer-book  with  hierarchy  and  social  caste,  but  them- 
selves permeated  as  never  before  with  the  influences  of 
Protestant  freedom  and  culture ;  and  it  remains  to  be  seen 
whether  even  these  least  pliable  types  of  organized  Christian- 
ity must  not  yet  yield  to  the  pressure  of  democratic  institu- 
tions and  the  plastic  force  of  American  society.  Be  that  as  it 
may,  so  long  as  the  religious,  political,  and  social  influences 
by  which  the  different  denominations  are  being  sifted  and 
fused  together  continue  to  operate  amongst  them,  they  will 
in  various  degrees  unitedly  approximate  a  Catholicism  which 
shall  be  truly  Protestant,  as  well  as  a  Protestantism  which 
shall  be  truly  Catholic.  In  a  word,  if  we  are  ever  to  have 
anything  answering  to  the  grand  conception  of  the  United 
Churches  of  the  United  States,  it  must  come  through  that 
spirit  of  Protestant  Catholicism  of  which  the  English  liturgy 
properly  amended  and  enriched,  would  be  the  best  conceiv- 
able expression. 

And  now  the  very  process  of  such  a  liturgical  concretion 
of  different  denominations  about  the  nucleus  of  the  prayer- 
book  has  reached  a  point  where  it  only  awaits  accomplishment. 
Bring  together  the  fragments  of  that  ancient  liturgy  as  pre- 
served by  some  churches,  or  coming  into  use  in  others,  and 
recombine  them  as  they  may  be  found  in  its  various  offices ; 
restore  more  fully  the  links  of  the  Christian  year,  which  are 
already  socially  and  legally  recognized  among  us,  and  let 
them  be  illustrated  by  the  epistles  and  gospels  which  have 
marked  their  circuit  for  centuries  past ;  arrange  the  present 
random  lessons  so  that  the  whole  Scriptures  may  be  publicly 
read  in  their  inspired  connection;  reduce  the  rambling  "long 
prayer"  to  the  lucid  order  and  fullness  of  the  Litany,  and 
add  a  few  well-chosen  collects  from  the  best  liturgies;  purge 
existing  hymnals  of  their  copious  doggerel  and  enrich  them 
only  with  hymns  which  have  become  classical,  and  at  the 
same  time  scrupulously  retain  a  learned  pulpit  and  the  liberty 
of  extemporaneous  worship  for  fit  times  and  occasions;  and 


Reaction  Toward  the  English  Littirgy.  31 

the  result  would  be  an  American  liturgy  expressing  the  es- 
sential common  faith  of  Catholic  and  Protestant  Christianity. 
The  general  conclusion  of  our  study  is  now  before  us  :  a 
doctrinal  compact  of  the  American  churches  can  only  be 
looked  for  in  the  distant  future ;  their  ecclesiastical  confed- 
eration may  be  nearer  at  hand  ;  but  their  liturgical  fusion  is 
passing  before  our  eyes  toward  its  only  logical  issue  in  the 
prayer-book.  How  such  a  fusion  is  likely  to  affect  the 
relations  existing  between  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
and  other  American  churches ;  whether  it  will  leave  those 
relations  unchanged  or  at  length  lead  to  mutual  recognition 
and  organic  connection — are  interesting  questions  which  may 
here  force  themselves  into  some  minds  ;  but  they  are  not  the 
most  urgent  questions  growing  out  of  the  investigation  ;  they 
belone.  as  we  have  seen,  to  the  future  rather  than  to  the 
present ;  and  they  are  quite  aside  from  the  main  object  of  this 
essay.  I  have  simply  aimed  to  present  certain  facts  and 
truths  to  those  who  are  deeply  interested  in  knowing  them. 


II. 

DENOMINATIONAL  VIEWS  OF 
CHURCH  UNITY. 


II- 

DENOMINATIONAL   VIEWS  OF  CHURCH  UNITY. 

The  reader  will  have  observed  that  the  preceding  essay  was 
in  no  sense  representative  of  denominational  views,  as  held  in 
any  church  or  party,  but  was  simply  an  independent  survey 
of  all  Christian  denominations  with  their  existing  grounds  of 
organic  unity  in  doctrine,  polity,  and  worship.  The  paper 
was  written  with  no  thought  whatever  of  the  criticism  which 
has  been  converged  upon  it  by  champions  of  the  different 
churches.  It  has  been  under  discussion  for  many  months,  until 
nearly  all  the  interested  parties  have  been  fully  heard.  In 
offering  a  brief  reply,  I  might  regret  the  seeming  odds  of  a 
battle  with  so  many  giants  at  once,  did  I  not  hope  to  stay  out 
of  the  battle  as  much  as  possible,  and  keep  to  the  main  ques- 
tion, in  which  alone  the  public  can  be  interested.  A  mere 
controversy  on  Christian  unity  would  indeed  be  but  a  sorry 
absurdity. 

As  it  has  been  strangely  assumed  that  the  essay  put  forth 
some  new-made  scheme  of  denominational  union,  in  particu- 
lar a  formal  coalition  on  the  basis  of  the  Anglican  prayer- 
book,  I  beg  to  recall  with  emphasis  my  introductory  state- 
ment : — 

"  We  are  not  yet  ready  for  such  schemes,  and  it  would  only  be  a  waste 
of  time  to  discuss  them.  The  first  lesson  to  be  learned  is  that  the  unifi- 
cation of  the  American  Churches,  if  it  is  ever  to  come  at  all,  cannot  be 
precipitated  by  platforms,  coalitions,  compromises,  in  short  by  any  mere 
external  association  of  the  different  denominations,  which  leaves  them 
still  without  internal  modifications  and  vital  connections,  as  true  and 
living  branches  of  the  Vine  of  Christ." 

35 


^6  Views  of  Church  Unity. 

In  pursuance  of  this  statement,  the  former  paper  was  a 
mere  historical  sketch  of  the  unconscious  growth  of  leading 
American  Churches  toward  organic  likeness  and  oneness,  as 
seen  especially  in  their  liturgical  communion.  The  plain  facts 
presented  in  that  sketch  have  not  been  denied  by  any  of  the 
distinguished  respondents,  and  all  the  objections  to  some  sup- 
posed liturgical  scheme  of  union  have,  therefore,  been  but  so 
many  formidable  javelins  hurled  into  the  air.  The  position 
taken  was  briefly  this :  Our  chief  historical  churches  have 
long  been  reacting  toward  the  Protestant  Catholicism  ex- 
pressed in  the  English  prayer-book.  That  position  has  not 
even  been  assailed  or  questioned.  Here  the  case  might  rest, 
if  the  aim  had  been  to  succeed  in  an  argument  rather  than  to 
arrive  at  the  truth. 

But  while  the  critics  of  the  essay  have  seemed  somewhat 
to  differ  from  it,  they  have  much  more  largely  agreed  with  it, 
and  with  one  another,  and  have  thus  revealed  a  remarkable 
consensus  of  opinions,  upon  which  we  may  now  build  up  a 
constructive  argument  for  the  continued  growth  of  church 
unity  in  the  future  along  the  lines  revealed  by  the  discussion. 
To  this  task  the  present  paper  is  mainly  devoted.  If  it  shall 
be  performed  even  imperfectly,  the  protracted  discussion  will 
not  have  been  in  vain. 

We  have  seen  that  the  various  ecclesiastical  and  quasi- 
ecclesiastical  or  pseudo-ecclesiastical  bodies  of  which  our 
American  Christianity  is  composed  may  be  studied  in  three 
general  groups  or  classes,  according  to  the  principles  prevail- 
ing in  their  structure:  The  Episcopal,  including  the  Roman 
Catholic,  Methodist,  and  Protestant  Episcopal  Churches;  the 
Pkesbyterial,  including  the  Lutheran,  Reformed,  and  Pres- 
byterian Churches;  the  Congregational,  including  the 
Baptist,  Orthodox  and  Unitarian  churches.  Representative 
divines  in  each  group  have  spoken  on  the  question  of 
Christian  union  or  church  unity,  and  thus  furnished  the 
materials  for  a  full  comparison  of  views.  Let  us  take  them 
in  the  order  which  we  have  adopted. 


Episcopalian  Opinions.  2>7 

Episcopalian  Opinions. 

The  Right  Rev.  Bishop  Dudley  and  the  Rev.  Dr.  J.  H. 
Hopkins  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  have  treated 
the  essay  with  great  kindness,  justice,  and  clearness.  They 
both  admit  substantially  its  general  conclusions — that  full 
dogmatic  agreement  is  still  a  long  way  off,  and  that  the  litur- 
gical fusion,  which  has  begun,  is  but  a  desirable  first  step 
towards  true  church  unity.  But  as  to  the  matter  of  polity, 
they  consistently  hold  that  Episcopacy  affords  the  only  basis 
or  form  of  organic  oneness.^  Against  this  opinion  their 
opponents  will  urge  several  considerations  : — 

First.  That  forms  of  doctrine  and  worship,  or  creeds  and  sac- 
raments, as  well  as  polity,  are  ecclesiastical  elements  affording 
grounds  or  germs  of  organic  unity,  and  are  much  more  im- 
portant than  any  mere  polity,  though  it  were  imagined  to  be 
of  the  most  perfect  Episcopal  form. 

Second.  That  as  a  matter  of  fact  the  Episcopal  polity, 
though  common  to  the  Greek,  Roman,  and  Anglican  churches, 
is  but  little  known  in  the  Protestant  churches  of  Europe  and 
America. 

Third.  That  Presbytery,  rather  than  Episcopacy,  is  the  one 
polity  which  by  common  consent  has  continued  historically, 
from  the  Apostles'  time  until  the  present  day,  in  all  the  chief 
churches  of  Christendom,  both  Catholic  and  Protestant. 

Fourth.  That  the  claim  to  an  Apostolate,  as  maintained  in 
these  letters,  is  not  allowed  by  other  Protestant  churches  nor 
by  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  and  is  practically  viewed  by 
both  as  involving  organized  schism  rather  than  organic  unity. 

Fifth.  That  instead  of  seeking  a  remote  alliance  with  the 


1  "  Leaving  out  of  view  entirely  the  question  of  a  scriptural  revelation,  and 
granting  that  there  is  no  definite  ecclesiastical  polity  laid  down  in  Scripture,  yet 
none  other  than  a  threefold  Ministry  of  Apostolic  succession  can  by  any  possi- 
bility be  made  satisfactory  to  the  great  and  ancient  Churches  of  the  East  and  of 
the  West,  even  could  the  Anglican  Communion  be  induced  for  the  sake  of  unity 
to  accept  another." — Bishop  Dudley. 


;^S  Views  of  Church  Unity. 

Greek  and  Latin  Churches,  it  were  better  to  begin  with  some 
organic  connection  of  the  kindred  English-speaking  Protest- 
ant churches,  Congregational,  Presbyterial,  and  Episcopal, 
and  on  the  basis  of  their  common  Anglo-Saxon  Christianity 
to  aim  at  the  more  general  unity  of  Christendom. 

Whether  these  views  be  right  or  wrong,  they  are  existing 
matters  of  opinion  which  must  enter  into  the  present  discus- 
sion, as  may  appear  hereafter.  It  is  a  very  pleasing  feature  of 
both  of  these  letters  that  they  breathe  an  earnest  Christian 
desire  and  hope  of  ultimate  church  unity. 

The  Rev.  Dr.  George  R.  Crooks,  of  the  Methodist  Episco- 
pal Church,  also  writes  in  a  union  spirit  and  is  in  accord  with 
the  essay  on  some  essential  points,  with  differences  which 
seem  mainly  verbal.  Mistaking  the  word  "  organic,"  as 
hitherto  defined  and  used,  he  applies  it  to  that  figurative 
organism  or  spiritual  body  of  Christ  in  which  all  true  Chris- 
tians are  joined  as  members,  rather  than  to  those  ecclesiastical 
organizations  or  organized  churches  which  are  not  one,  but 
many,  and  more  or  less  hostile  to  each  other.^  Organic  one- 
ness, in  the  former  sense  of  one  Christian  body,  is  indeed  an 
established  fact,  and  happily  a  fact  that  goes  without  the  say- 
ing in  these  papers,  since  they  would  scarcely  be  possible  but 
for  its  tacit  assumption ;  but  organic  oneness,  in  the  common 
sense  of  one  church  organization, is  unhappily  not  a  fact;  and 
though  such  unity  be  not  deemed  vital  or  fundamental,  yet  it 
may  be  important,  if  not  indispensable,  as  will  hereafter  be 
shown.  Dr.  Crooks  also  mistakes  the  term  Catholic  for 
"  Roman  Catholic,"  and  is  thereby  led  into  a  view  of  the  rela- 
tions of  Protestantism  and  Catholicism  which  may  be  modi- 
fied by  one  or  two  suggestions. 

First.  True  Catholicism,  if  defined  to  be  historic  Christianity 
as   freed  from  Roman  errors,  is  not  inconsistent  with  "  New 


1  "  The  unity  of  the  Churches  is  an  established,  a  divine  fact,  and  that  unity 
is  necessarily  organic.  The  Church  is  already  one  by  virtue  of  the  life  which 
pertains  to  all  its  members  as  members  of  Christ." 


Episcopalian  Opiniofis.  39 

Testament  Christianity,"  but  is  the  choicest  fruit  of  its  own 
divine  development  in  history.  The  Protestants  themselves, 
as  their  name  implies,  did  not  wholly  renounce  it ;  nor  can 
we  renounce  it,  unless  we  are  ready  for  the  frightful  theory 
that  during  fifteen  centuries  from  the  Apostles'  time  until  the 
reformation  there  was  no  Church  or  providence,  but  only  one 
long  reign  of  sin  and  Satan. 

Second.  Such  Catholic  Christianity  is  in  fact  more  or  less 
fully  retained  by  Protestant  churches  in  their  forms  of  doc- 
trine, polity,  and  worship,  which  are  not  to  be  found  clearly 
set  forth  in  the  New  Testament,  but  are  very  largely  an  out- 
growth from  it  in  Church  history  under  divine  Providence. 
The  Methodist  Church,  for  example,  has  a  modified  episco- 
pate, liturgy,  and  articles,  which  it  inherited  directly  from 
the  Church  of  England,  remotely  from  the  Church  of  Rome, 
though  without  other  accompanying  dogmas  held  in  those 
churches. 

Third.  The  Protestant  body  in  its  recoil  from  Romanism 
may  have  gone  too  far  away  from  Catholicism,  into  such  ex- 
tremes as  sectarianism,  rationalism  and  revivalism ;  but  a 
healthy  reaction  has  already  begun,  as  we  have  shown,  in 
regard  to  the  historic  liturgy,  and  it  may  yet  extend  to  the 
other  diseases  or  abuses  of  Protestantism,  until  a  true  church 
unity  shall  have  taken  the  place  of  our  sectarianism,  and  our 
latest  rationalism  at  length  give  way  to  the  vindicated 
Catholic  faith. 

Fourth.  The  Roman  Church  and  the  chief  Protestant 
churches,  notwithstanding  their  wide  differences,  rest  primarily 
upon  the  same  Holy  Scriptures  and  share  largely  the  same 
Catholic  Christianity;  and  it  is  at  least  conceivable  that  in  the 
lapse  of  time,  by  the  transmuting  force  of  American  institutions, 
and  under  the  pressure  of  common  dangers,  they  may  be 
brought  slowly  together  from  their  present  extremes,  having 
shed  their  respective  errors  until  at  last  they  join  in  the  one 
essential  faith  of  Protestant  Catholicism  as  the  full  flower  of 
New   Testament    Christianity.       Professor    Crooks    himself 


40  Vieius  of  Church  Unity. 

argues  very  forcibly  that  the  chief  Roman  dogma  of  sacer- 
dotal supremacy  is  doomed  to  die  out,  both  in  Church  and 
State,  in  the  wake  of  political  causes  ;  and  he  may  thus  refute 
his  own  imaginary  picture  of  an  immediate  crude  coalition 
of  "  Romanists  and  Protestants  in  one  ecclesiastical  govern- 
ment." 

Fifth.  The  English  liturgy,  as  we  have  seen,  affords  the 
grounds  and  germs  of  such  a  gradual  coalescence  of  Protestant 
with  Catholic  Christianity  in  the  American  churches ;  and 
when  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  completes  its  reaction 
with  the  rest,  the  Wesleyan  prayer-book,  instead  of  lying  a 
nullity,  will  serve  to  bring  it  into  more  visible  communion 
and  organic  connection  with  the  other  great  historic  churches 
of  Christendom. 

Dr.  Crooks,  as  a  representative  of  episcopacy  without 
apostolical  succession,  finds  no  organic  bond  between  the 
Greek,  Latin,  and  Anglican  churches,  but  hopes  for  some 
closer  union  of  the  Protestant  churches,  to  be  reached  by 
recognizing  their  essential  spiritual  unity  as  a  divine  fact ;  by 
acknowledging  one  another's  churchly  standing  in  their  inter- 
course; and  by  coming  into  more  organic  cooperation  for  the 
great  ends  of  their  common  Christianity. 

Presbyterian  Opinions. 

The  two  representatives  of  the  Presbyterian  church  have 
reviewed  the  essay  from  different  standpoints.  The  late  Dr. 
Archibald  Alexander  Hodge,  as  if  with  a  prophetic  utterance, 
and  in  an  elevated  Christian  tone  befitting  the  theme,  discussed 
the  doctrine  of  the  invisible  Catholic  Church,  and  set  forth  in 
glowing  terms  its  unbroken  unity,  as  including  not  merely  all 
true  believers  on  earth,  but  the  whole  company  of  the  redeemed 
in  heaven. 

The  surviving  disputants  may  well  recognize  such  doctrine 
as  common  ground,  while  still  taking  to  themselves  the 
reproach  that  the  visible  church  as  yet  so  little  reflects  the  one- 
ness of  the  Church  invisible.     Unhappily,  our  existing  de- 


Presbyterian  Opinions.  41 

nominations  cannot  be  viewed  merely  as  so  many  harmonious 
groups  of  organized  churches,  or  legitimate  varieties  of 
church  organization,  dvvelHng  together  in  manifest  unity. 
Having  been  largely  produced  by  warring  sects  and  factions, 
excommunicating  and  unchurching  one  another,  they  exhibit 
an  apparent  dismemberment  of  the  very  body  of  Christ,  which 
has  become  the  great  flagrant  scandal  of  our  age  and  country, 
and  has  made  it  the  plain  duty  as  well  as  impulse  of  all  Chris- 
tian people  to  seek  for  more  outward  organic  unity,  as  well  as 
to  hail  the  providential  signs  of  its  inward  growth  and  expres- 
sion. In  any  other  view,  we  could  only  adjourn  our  questions 
of  doctrine  to  the  millennium,  and  wait  until  we  may  all  join 
in  the  perfect  liturgy  of  heaven.  Practically,  indeed,  this  is 
the  course  taken  by  some  extremists  who  would  consecrate 
mere  denominationalism,  extenuate  sectarianism,  and  make 
schism  itself  chronic,  in  the  face  of  their  own  false  dormant 
ideal  of  an  invisible  Catholic  Church. 

In  contrast  with  such  errors,  Dr.  Hodge  has  impressively 
shown  that  the  various  church  organizations,  through  the  in- 
dwelling Spirit,  will  yet  grow  together  toward  a  true  organic 
unity  consistent  with  due  variety,  as  but  so  many  members  in 
the  one  mystical  body  of  Christ.  And  the  latter  part  of  his 
letter  refers  to  such  unity  in  the  three  organic  spheres  of  doc- 
trine, polity,  and  worship.  As  to  the  first,  his  hopeful  view 
of  the  dogmatic  consensus  of  Protestant  Trinitarian  churches 
is  a  most  valuable  and  timely  contribution  to  the  general  argu- 
ment for  church  unity,  and  would  be  only  more  complete 
could  it  include  on  the  basis  of  a  common  American  Christian- 
ity, those  Unitarian  churches  which  express  the  flower  of 
Puritan  culture,  as  well  as  the  great  Roman  Catholic  Church 
which  is  already  in  the  lead  on  such  social  questions  as  mar- 
riage, temperance,  education,  and  property.  As  to  the  second 
opinion,  that  unity  in  polity  would  be  more  difficult  than  unity 
in  dogma,  I  have  nothing  to  add  to  the  former  paper,  except 
what  may  be  found  in  the  sequel.  As  to  the  third,  it  may  be 
said  that  the  argument  from  numbers  against  the  growth  of 


42  Views  of  Church  Unity. 

liturgical  communion,  like  most  statistical  arguments,  can  be 
used  on  both  sides  of  the  question,  and  will  probably  be  met 
from  the  other  side  by  such  answers  as  the  following  : — 

First.  That  the  liturgical  churches  of  Christendom  out- 
number in  membership  the  non-liturgical  churches  as  three 
or  four  to  one. 

Second.  That  in  this  country  it  is  the  least  ecclesiastical 
denominations,  the  evanescent  sects,  that  are  without  liturgi- 
cal tendencies,  as  they  are  crude  in  their  doctrine  and  polity  ; 
while  only  the  historical  churches,  of  European  origin,  can 
yield  the  proper  data  of  the  church  problem,  and  these  are 
vitally  connected  with  the  contents  of  the  English  liturgy  in  a 
ratio  of  forty  or  fifty  to  one.  Moreover,  as  we  have  seen,  they 
are  already,  knowingly  or  unknowingly,  resuming  elements 
and  portions  of  that  liturgy  in  their  worship,  and  logically 
tend  to  it  as  the  best  devotional  formulary  of  Catholic  and 
Protestant  Christianity. 

This  starts  the  only  question  in  the  other  letter  demanding 
attention.  In  meeting  it,  I  must  reluctantly  forsake,  for  the 
moment,  an  independent  position,  and  come  down  to  the 
denominational  ground  which  the  critic  has  taken.  The 
Rev.  Dr.  Howard  Crosby,  declaring  himself  an  out-and-out 
Presbyterian,  offers  seven  objections  to  the  prayer-book  as 
received  opinions  in  the  Presbyterian  Church.^  With  due 
respect,  I  am  obliged  to  say  that  not  one  of  them  has  any 
foundation  in  the  recognized  standards  of  that  body.  My 
replies  must  be  brief 

First.  The  Directory  for  Public  Worship  (ch.  v.)  does  not 


1  I.  "  They  object  to  the  breaking  up  of  prayer  into  little  fragments,  each  be- 
ginning with  an  invocation  and  ending  with  a  formal  peroration.  They  consider 
this  style  of  prayer  too  artificial  and  leading  to  a  mechanical  worship. 

2.  They  object  to  the  open-eyed  reading  of  prayer,  as  tending  to  withdraw  the 
mind  from  the  unseen. 

3.  They  object  to  the  stereotyped  prayer,  however  excellent. 

4.  They  object  to  the  Litany  in  foto,  as  putting  the  believer  far  off  from  God, 
calling  on  him  to  spare  him  as  a  miserable  sinner.     .     .     .     The  Litany  has  no 


Presbyterian  Opinions.  43 

"object  to  the  stereotyped  prayer,  however  excellent,"  but 
does  object  to  "  mean,  irregular,  or  extravagant  effusions,  as 
a  disgrace  of  divine  service."  Such  effusions,  becoming 
themselves  stereotyped,  are  worse  than  any  "  open-eyed  read- 
ing of  prayer,"  and  in  fact  sometimes  open  the  eyes  of  the 
unhappy  listeners. 

Second.  The  Larger  Catechism  (Q.  1S6-188)  does  not 
object  to  the  invocation,  peroration,  and  well  ordered  brief 
petitions  which  it  finds  in  the  Lord's  Prayer  as  being  "  too 
artificial  and  tending  to  a  mechanical  mode  of  worship  ;"  but 
it  does  prescribe  the  right  use  of  that  liturgical  form  and 
didactic  model  of  common  prayer.  To  repeat  it,  at  least  once 
in  each  public  office  is  not  treating  it  "  as  a  mere  magical 
formula,"  but  is  keeping  strictly  within  the  scriptural  rubric, 
"When  ye  pray,  say  Our  Father." 

Third.  The  Shorter  Catechism  (Q.  99)  enjoins  the  whole 
word  of  God  as  a  rule  of  prayer;  and  if  therefore  any  "  Pres- 
byterians object  to  the  Litany  in  toto  as  putting  the  believer 
far  off  from  God  and  calling  on  him  to  spare  him  as  a  miser- 
able sinner,"  they  simply  object  with  the  Pharisee  to  the 
very  words  of  the  contrite  Publican,  as  well  as  to  the  peniten- 
tial prayers  of  priest  and  people  weeping  between  the  porch 
and  the  altar.  If  they  object  to  its  devout  repetitions  as 
"  unmeaning,"  they  must  object  to  the  like  repetitions  in 
Holy  Scripture.  If  they  could  object  to  its  solemn  pleadings 
and  tender  entreaties  and  manifold  intercessions  as  "  having  no 
feature  suited  to  the  child  of  God  or  joint  heir  with  Christ," 

feature  suited  to  the  "heir  of  God  or  joint-heir  with  Christ."  Many  of  the 
features  of  the  Litany  (like  the  prayer  against  sudden  death)  are  but  rehcs  of 
Romanism,  and  its  repetitions  are  unmeaning. 

5.  They  object  to  the  absolution  declaration,  which  is  only  a  toning  down  of 
the  Roman  absolution  bestowal. 

6.  They  object  to  the  repetitions  of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  as  if  it  were  a  magical 
formula,  which  was  made  effective  by  frequent  repetition. 

7.  They  object  to  the  clear  remnants  of  transubstantiation  in  the  Communion 
Service  and  of  baptismal  regeneration  in  the  Baptismal  Service — two  doctrines 
which  Presbyterians  abhor." 


44  Views  of  Church  Unity. 

they  would  object  to  the  supplications  of  the  prophets  and 
apostles  themselves.  But  before  they  object  to  its  scriptural 
petition  against  sudden  death  as  "  a  relic  of  Romanism,"  they 
should  consult  the  Roman  original  (a  subitanea  et  improvisa 
morte)  or  the  Anglo-Saxon  version  (a  subita  et  eterna  morte). 
They  might  also  profitably  consider  the  beams  in  their  own 
extempore  litanies,  the  "  irreverent,"  the  "  sarcastic,"  the 
"  tedious  prayers,"  etc.,  of  which  that  accomplished  Presby- 
terian divine,  Dr.  Samuel  Miller,  speaks  in  his  useful  treatise. 

Fourth.  The  Form  of  Government  (ch.  iii.  v.)  does  not 
"  hold  that  all  believers  are  priests  "  in  the  sense  of  being 
Ministers,  or  that  "  a  minister  is  only  an  ordained  ruler  and 
leader  of  the  people,  with  no  more  authority  to  pronounce 
absolution  upon  the  penitent  than  any  one  who  is  not  a  min- 
ister ;"  but  it  does  most  plainly  distinguish  him  from  the  mere 
representatives  of  the  people  as  a  minister  of  Christ  and 
ambassador  from  God,  declaring  pardon  in  Christ's  stead. 
The  Confession  also  (ch.  xxx.)  names  among  his  high  func- 
tions, "  power  to  open  the  kingdom  of  heaven  unto  penitent 
sinners  by  the  ministry  of  the  Gospel,  and  by  absolution  from 
censures,  as  occasion  shall  require."  Consistently  with  such 
teaching,  the  declarative  Absolution,  prefixed  to  the  English 
daily  service  is  simply  an  authoritative  proclamation  of  the 
Gospel,  made  solemn  and  direct  by  a  special  act  of  worship 
on  the  part  both  of  minister  and  people.  If  any  Presbyterians 
are  thoughtless  enough  to  object  to  that  formula  as  "  a  rem- 
nant of  the  Roman  Absolution,"  they  should  be  informed  that 
its  very  motive  was  as  Protestant  as  its  meaning ;  that  it  was 
first  suggested  by  Calvin  himself;  that  it  was  taken  very  largely 
from  a  Calvinistic  liturgy;  and  that  it  was  alternatively  called 
the  Absolution  or  Remission  of  sins,  in  deference  to  Puritan 
scruples  against  a  word  of  Popish  sound. 

Fifth.  The  Confession  of  Faith  (ch.  xxviii.)  does  not  "  ab- 
hor the  doctrine  of  baptismal  regeneration  "  as  rightly  stated, 
but  does  declare  it  a  "great  sin  to  contemn  this  ordinance," 
guards  carefully  against  the  abuse  of  it,  and  defines  it  as  a 


Presbyterian  Opinions.  45 

"sign  and  seal  of  regeneration  even  unto  infants  "  (Q.  177). 
And  the  Baptismal  Offices  merely  express  the  substantial 
sense  of  this  definition  in  strong  liturgical  terms.  Any  Pres- 
byterians who  abhor  such  doctrine  may  find  it  discreetly 
maintained  by  that  saintly  man,  the  late  Dr.  Archibald  Alex- 
ander, in  the  second  chapter  of  his  work  on  religious  experi- 
ence. As  to  the  Holy  Supper,  the  Confession  takes  some 
higher  views  of  the  Real  Presence  than  can  anywhere  be 
found  in  the  English  Communion  office.  In  fact,  the  only 
"  remnant  of  transubstantiation  "  that  appears  in  that  office  is 
a  solemn  ordinance  against  it  as  "  idolatry  to  be  abhorred  of 
all  faithful  Christians."  Presbyterians  who  are  horrified  at 
such  a  rag  of  popery  will  have  their  horror  increased  on 
learning  that  the  stringent  rubric  was  first  procured  by  that 
uncompromising  reformer,  John  Knox,  in  1552,  and  fully 
confirmed  at  the  last  revision  in  1661,  according  to  Mr.  Proc- 
ter's history  of  the  prayer-book,  "  in  compliance  with  the 
wishes  of  the  Presbyterians." 

Sixth.  The  chief  framers  of  the  above  named  standards, 
though  certainly  "  not  in  love  with  the  Episcopal  liturgy  "  as 
it  was  imposed  upon  them  by  the  Act  of  Uniformity  two  cen- 
turies ago,  protested  that  they  had  "  not  the  least  thought  of 
depraving  or  reproaching  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,"  but 
wished  only  to  "  avoid  both  the  extreme  that  would  have  no 
forms  and  the  contrary  extreme  that  would  have  nothing 
but  forms  ;"^  and  their  exceptions  to  the  prayer-book,  in 
matters  of  mere  usage  and  taste  as  well  as  principle,  like 
some  of  the  objections  before  us,  have  long  since  been  fully 
met  by  the  changed  conditions  of  American  Presbyterianisni 
which  now  neither  enjoins  nor  forbids  the  use  of  a  liturgy. 

Seventh.  The  Presbyterian  Book  of  Common  Prayer  affords 
a  summary  refutation  to  Dr.  Crosby's  objections,  all  and  each 
of  them.  Among  the  legal  revisers  of  the  English  Liturgy 
in  1 66 1  were  the  very  authors  of  the  Presbyterian  formularies, 

1  Documents  of  Revision,  1661. 


46  Views  of  Church  Unity, 

such  as  Anthony  Tuckney,  Regius  Professor  of  Divinity  at 
Cambridge,  who  had  written  nearly  the  whole  of  the  larger 
Catechism  ;  John  Wallis,  Savilian  Professor  of  Geometry  at 
Oxford,  who  had  been  secretary  to  the  Westminster  divines, 
and  had  himself  prepared  the  Shorter  Catechism  ;  Edward 
Reynolds,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Norwich  and  author  of  the 
general  Thanksgiving,  who  had  composed  the  most  important 
parts  of  the  Confession  of  Faith ;  Edmund  Calamy,  the  very 
leader  of  the  Presbyterian  clergy,  who  with  Spurstow,  New- 
comen,  and  Arrowsmith  had  been  in  the  Assembly's  com- 
mittee that  framed  the  Directory  of  Worship  and  Church 
Government ;  to  say  nothing  of  the  learned  Lightfoot,  the 
silver-tongued  Bates,  the  saintly  Baxter,  and  other  great 
Presbyterian  scholars  whose  praise  is  in  all  the  churches. 
The  emendations  and  exceptions  of  such  men,  duly  modi- 
fied by  American  authorities,  precedents,  and  usages,  yield  an 
edition  of  the  prayer-book^  to  which  no  Presbyterian  can 
bring  any  objections  whatever  without  taking  the  ground 
from  under  his  feet.  On  such  ground  an  out-and-out  Presby- 
terian, could  only  become  a  valiant  champion,  not  merely 
of  the  prayer-book,  but  of  that  church  unity  which  is  an 
essential  principle  of  Presbyterian  polity  as  well  as  the  flower 
of  Christian  charity. 

Resuming  now  our  task,  we  may  sum  up  Presbyterian 
opinion,  according  to  the  teachings  of  Dr.  Hodge,  as  based 
upon  the  inward  spiritual  oneness  of  the  churches,  yet  look- 
ing forward  to  their  outward  organic  oneness,  still  to  be 
attained  through  the  slow  ripening  of  their  knowledge,  love, 
and  zeal,  and  other  graces  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 


1  The  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  as  amended  by  the  Presbyterian  Divines  in 
the  Royal  Commission  of  l66l,  and  in  agreement  with  the  Directory  for  Public 
Worship  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States.  With  a  supplementary 
treatise  by  the  author  of  these  essays. 


Congregationalist  Opinions.  47 

CONGREGATIONALIST    OPINIONS. 

The  letters  of  the  two  learned  divines  representing  the  Or- 
thodox Congregational  churches,  though  making  no  allusion 
to  the  essay,  admit  of  a  logical  connection  with  it  as  affording 
valuable  opinions  needed  to  complete  this  survey.  President 
Seelye,  of  Amherst  College,  gives  a  profoundly  spiritual  view 
of  the  fellowship  of  saints  and  of  churches,  and  likens  the 
universal  church  to  a  universal  state,  as  being  one  in  its 
essence,  though  manifold  in  its  forms.  Congregational,  Presby- 
terial.  Episcopal,  and  as  tending  finally  to  a  Christian  theoc- 
racy, in  which  the  autonomy  of  the  particular  church  shall 
be  consistent  with  the  autocracy  of  the  universal  church.  The 
analogy,  however,  fails  at  the  essential  point,  since  there  is  no 
invisible  universal  State  corresponding  to  the  invisible  cath- 
olic Church  of  which  Christ  is  the  head. 

Professor  Fisher,  of  Yale  College,  in  his  more  practical  and 
very  suggestive  letter,  maintains  that,  since  the  decree  of  Papal 
infallibility.  Christian  union  is  practicable  only  among  Protes- 
tant denominations;  and  he  finds  three  obstacles  to  such 
union — one,  in  the  reigning  dogmatic  intolerance ;  another,  in 
the  prevalent  ritual  diversity,  especially  as  to  the  rite  of  bap- 
tism, and  a  third,  in  the  divine-right  theory  of  church  govern- 
ment as  held  by  Episcopalians,  Presbyterians,  and  some  Con- 
gregationalists.  At  the  same  time,  he  admits  that  a  mere 
governmental,  as  distinguished  from  a  sacerdotal  Episcopacy, 
would  not  be  repugnant  to  other  Protestants,  and  that  an 
optional  liturgy,  used  alternatively  with  spontaneous  worship, 
might  in  some  cases  prove  an  advantage.  Professor  Fisher 
clearly  discerns  the  rising  spirit  of  church  unity,  when  he 
says:  "The  centrifugal  age  of  Protestantism  is  closed.  The 
centripetal  action  has  begun." 

Although  both  of  these  writers  say  but  little  of  any  organi- 
zation beyond  the  limits  of  the  local  church  or  parish,  yet  it 
is  well  known  that  such  organization  exists,  more  or  less 
ecclesiastical  in  its  tendencies  and  without  destroying  the  self- 


48  Viezvs  of  CJmrch  U^iity. 

government  of  congregations,  as  is  seen  in  their  voluntary 
association  for  some  church  purposes,  as  well  as  in  that  prac- 
tical Congregationalism  which  prevails  under  presbyterial  and 
episcopal  systems. 

Two  eloquent  divines  have  spoken  for  the  Unitarian  Con- 
cfreeational  churches.     We  can  all  agree  with  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Edward  Everett  Hale,  when  he  asserts  that  Christian  Unity 
exists  in  America  now,  in  the  sense  in  which  he  understands 
it.^     But  church  unity,  the  fusion  of  Christian  sects  into  the 
one  church,  does  not  exist,  nor  can  "  people  who  want  it  find  it 
by  going  out  of  doors,"  by  simply  mingling  together  in  humane 
recreations,  however  good  and  healthful.     The  civilized  Chris- 
tain  of  this  epoch  does  not  always  live  out-of-doors.     Church 
organizations,  with  creed  and  ritual  rooted  far  back  in  history, 
have  earned  their  right  to  be  ;  and  just  now  they  are  reassert- 
ing that  right.     Dr.  Hale  very  aptly  likens  them  to  the  inde- 
pendent colonies  before  they  had  become  compacted  in  the 
national  union;  and  denies  that  "the  work  of  the  church  is 
better  done  by  its  several  sections  when  they  keep  a  strict 
organization  among  themselves,  and  each  lets  the  other  sec- 
tions   severely  alone."      That    was    once    the   war    cry,  we 
remember,  of  a  large  section  of  the  United  States  ;  and  now 
and    then    we    hear   something    like    it   among    the    united 
churches.     But  if  ever  we  get  a  good  working  constitution 
for  them,  it  will  harmonize  the  local  with  the  general  church 
in   all  forms   of  Christian   well-doing,   and,  unlike  that  lost 
formula  of  church  polity  which  our  accomplished  critic   de- 
scribes, it  can  neither  be  mislaid  nor  burned  in  a  Boston  fire. 
More  forlorn  even  than  the  "  Man  without  a  Country,"  whom 
he  has  depicted,  would  be  a  Christian  without  the  Church. 
With  a  generous  largeness  of  view,  Professor  A.  P.  Peabody, 


1  "  The  simple  truth  seems  to  be  that  Christian  unity  exists  in  America  now 
for  any  one  who  wants  it.  Those  people  have  it,  who  were  born  out-of-doors, 
in  the  open  air  freedom  of  the  Christian  Church.  ...  He  has  only  to  walk 
out  of  his  own  house  and  go  to  work  with  other  men  in  some  good  enter- 
prise, which  the  good  God  wishes  to  have  carried  through." 


Congregatio7ialist  Opinions.  49 

of  Harvard  University,  reveals  the  ground  common  to  Uni- 
tarianism  and  Orthodoxy  in  the  divine  humanity  of  Christ, 
though  he  maintains,  like  other  correspondents,  that  full 
agreement  in  the  realm  of  metaphysical  divinity  is  not  attain- 
able, nor  desirable.  His  practical  conclusion  is  that  Christians 
should  unite  in  recognizing  heartily  their  common  Christ- 
likeness,  in  promoting  Christian  righteousness,  and  in  main- 
taining Christian  worship  so  far  as  the  common  faith  will 
allow.  These  are  not  only  important  grounds  of  Christian 
union,  but  may  also  be  ranked  among  the  conditions  precedent 
to  church  unity. 

As  an  able  representative  of  the  Baptist  Congregational 
churches,  the  Rev.  Dr.  R.  S.  MacArthur,  of  New  York  City, 
dwells  upon  the  growth  of  union  in  worship  by  means  of 
liturgies  as  well  as  revivals,  and  upon  the  large  amount  of 
essential  unity  in  doctrine  which  already  exists  in  default  of 
anything  like  organic  union.  But  when  Dr.  MacArthur  so 
intrepidly  maintains  that  "  organic  union  can  only  be  reached 
at  the  baptistery,"  because  many  scholars  have  admitted  that 
immersion  is  a  scriptural  mode  of  baptism,  he  forgets  what  an 
insignificant  minority  have  held  that  it  is  the  only  scriptural 
mode,  and  how  prevalent  infant  baptism  has  been  in  the  uni- 
versal church.^  The  spread  of  open  communion  in  his  own 
denomination  is  one  of  the  most  cheering  signs  of  the  times, 
and  affords  practical  ground  for  the  hope  that  pedobaptist  and 
anabaptist  congregations  might  yet  be  embraced  within  the 
same  denominational  or  ecclesiastical  system.  The  need  of 
the  hour  is  not  concession,  but  toleration. 

Of  all  the  congregationalist  letters.  Orthodox,  Unitarian, 
Baptist,  it  may  now  be  summarily  remarked,  that  not  one  of 
them  has  exhibited  Congregationalism  as  hostile  to  church 
unity  or  as  wholly  inconsistent  with  some  ecclesiastical  or- 


1  "The  point  I  make  is  this:  All  are  agreed  on  immersion  as  baptism;  all 
cannot  agree  on  anything  else.     .      .     .     The  plain  teaching  of  the  Bible  to  the 
unlearned,  is  in  harmony  with  the  conclusions  of  the  highest  scholarship." 
4 


50  Views  of  Church  Uriity. 

ganization  of  congregations,  which  did  not  trench  upon  their 

local  rights  and  privileges. 

Such  are  the  three  chief  sets  of  opinions  now  before  us  for 

comparison.     At  first  sight  the  differences  might  seem  to  be 

very   great ;    but   it  will    be    found   that  some  of  them   are 

ereater  within  the  same  denomination  than  between  different 

denominations,  or  greater  within  the  same  group  than  between 

different  groups  of  churches.     And  it  will  also  be  found  that 

all  the  differences  are  much  less  vital  and  important  than  the 

agreements. 

Consensus  of  Opinions. 

In  the  first  place,  there  is  a  consensus  of  Congregationalist, 
Presbyterian,  and  Episcopalian  opinions  in  regard  to  the 
spiritual  oneness  of  all  true  Christians,  however  variously 
they  may  be  organized  in  their  different  churches  and  denom- 
inations. This  unity  has  been  described  with  more  or  less 
clearness  as  a  communion  of  saints,  a  universal  fellowship  of 
believers,  a  spiritual  unity  of  churches,  an  invisible  Catholic 
Church  ;  but  however  expressed,  it  is  a  note  of  essential 
harmony  amid  the  apparent  discord.  It  enables  the  strictest 
churchman,  whether  he  be  an  Episcopalian,  a  Presbyterian, 
or  a  Congregationalist,  to  recognize  heartily  the  Christian 
character  of  multitudes,  now  attached  to  organized  forms  of 
Christianity,  which  he  believes  to  be  false  and  pernicious,  and 
cannot  by  any  official  act  recognize  as  regular  or  valid  ;  and 
it  affords  a  broad  platform  on  which  our  churches  may  com- 
bine more  or  less  consciously  and  formally,  in  the  confession 
of  the  same  Catholic  creed,  and  largely  in  the  use  of  the 
same  historic  liturgy.  Underneath  all  existing  structures  of 
church  polity  ever  remains  this  common  Christianity,  this 
united  faith  in  Christ,  as  their  one  divine  foundation. 

In  the  second  place,  even  as  to  the  remaining  differences  in 
polity,  the  writers  are  agreed  that  such  barriers  are  not  fixed 
and  final,  but  shall  yet,  somehow,  disappear  in  the  church  of 
the  future.  The  Episcopalian  may  hope  to  see  the  episcopate 
supersede  all  other  systems  or  become  their  unifying  bond 


Consensus  of  Opinio7is.  5 1 

and  center.  The  Presbyterian  may  look  forward  to  some 
further  extension  of  the  Presbyterial  principle  through  exist- 
ing church  organizations.  The  Congregationalist  may  antici- 
pate self-governing  congregations  even  under  presbytery  or 
episcopacy,  as  stripped  of  hierarchical  claims.  Each  may 
project  his  ideal  church  into  a  millenium,  more  or  less  dis- 
tant ;  may  behold  in  that  church  a  unity  consistent  with  more 
or  less  diversity ;  and  may  see  that  church  unity  at  length 
attained  through  causes  more  or  less  divine  or  human.  But 
all  will  consent  to  view  the  present  sectarian  condition  of 
Christianity,  especially  of  Protestant  Christianity,  as  abnor- 
mal and  transient,  and  stand  ready  to  welcome  any  hopeful 
means  of  promoting  greater  oneness  and  harmony. 

In  the  third  place,  the  remaining  differences  in  mere  church 
polity  admit,  even  now,  of  a  theoretical  adjustment.  Without 
wandering  off  into  a  vague  future,  we  can  fancy  an  ecclesiasti- 
cal system  in  which  Congregationalism,  Presbyterianism,  and 
Episcopalianism,  as  we  know  them  in  this  country,  might  so 
limit  and  modify  each  other  as  to  exist  without  conflict,  each 
in  its  own  beneficent  sphere  of  action.  In  such  a  complete 
polity  presbytery  would  keep  the  equipoise  between  the 
centrifugal  tendencies  of  Congregationalism  and  the  centri- 
petal tendencies  of  episcopacy,  ever  preserving  particular 
congregations  in  their  due  autonomy,  and  at  the  same  time 
combining  them  in  a  true  cathedral  system  of  schools,  mis- 
sions, and  charities.  It  may  be  the  destiny  of  the  American 
church  thus  to  bring  into  normal  connection  and  organic  life 
three  ecclesiastical  elements,  which,  in  the  Anglican  estab- 
lishment were  forced  together  in  false  relations  or  driven  out 
of  it  into  hurtful  extremes,  but  which  in  this  new  world  have 
had  full  scope  and  development  until  now  they  are  ready  for 
a  just  coalescence.  In  this  manner  might  be  reached  what 
was  described  in  the  former  essay  as  "  some  comprehensive 
polity,  which  shall  be  at  once  Congregational,  Presbyterial, 
and  Episcopal,  and  wherein  Protestant  freedom  and  intel- 
ligence shall  appear  reconciled  with  Catholic  authority  and 


5  2  Views  of  Church  Unity. 

order."  By  this  means  the  very  terms  Presbyterial,  Congre- 
gational, Episcopal  would  lose  their  polemic  sense,  and  all 
sectarian  titles  vanish  in  an  organization  which  would  be  in 
fact,  even  if  not  in  name,  the  American  Catholic  Church. 

In  the  fourth  place,  such  an  ideal  adjustment  of  differences 
in  church  polity  has  long  been  becoming  actual  in  the  history 
of  the  American  churches.  As  we  have  seen,  the  old  issues 
between  them  are  all  but  dead,  if  not  ready  for  honorable 
burial.  The  Cavalier,  the  Covenanter,  the  Huguenot,  and  the 
Puritan  now  live  only  in  history  and  romance.  Their  hot 
blood  has  become  peacefully  blended  in  their  American 
descendants,  and  we  now  dwell  upon  their  virtues  rather  than 
upon  their  faults.  He  must  simply  fight  against  himself  who 
would  fight  against  any  one  of  them.  In  other  words,  the 
unconscious  assimilation  of  churches,  after  a  hundred  years 
of  intermarriage  and  social  fusion,  has  reached  a  point  where 
they  differ  more  in  names  than  in  things.  Congregationalists 
have  now  and  then  an  extemporized  presbytery  called  an  As- 
sociation, and  here  and  there  a  truly  episcopal  divine  without 
the  title  of  Bishop.  Presbyterians  in  emergencies  practice 
the  most  independent  Congregationalism,  and  love  to  speak  of 
their  pastors  as  parochial  bishops,  lacking  only  the  excellent 
rite  of  confirmation.  Episcopalians,  after  having  been  also 
without  that  rite  during  the  two  hundred  years  of  their 
colonial  history,  may  now  boast  of  presbyterian  elements  in 
their  polity  and  a  congregationalist  freedom  in  their  ritual. 
And  all  three  are  not  only  professing  the  same  essential  doc- 
trines, but  singing  the  same  hymns  and  beginning  to  say  the 
same  prayers.  Let  such  changes  go  on,  and  after  awhile  we 
may  wake  out  of  our  useless  strifes  to  find  that  we  have  only 
been  viewing  the  same  shield  from  different  standpoints,  the 
same  church  under  different  phases ;  becoming  Presbyterians, 
Congregationalists,  Episcopalians, by  turns  without  knowing  it. 

In  the  fifth  place,  this  gradual  fusion  of  such  ecclesiastical 
differences  has  at  length  come  into  public  consciousness  as  an 
avowed  aim  for  concerted  action.     Christian  people  all   over 


Signs  of  CJmrch  Unity.  53 

the  land  are  trying  to  find  how  much  they  agree,  rather  than 
how  much  they  differ.  Leading  minds  in  the  various  churches, 
from  their  several  points  of  view,  are  approaching  the  great 
problem  of  compacting  our  American  Christianity  against  the 
gathering  foes  which  menace  it.  Union  in  church  as  well  as 
in  state  is  looming  high  and  large  as  the  question  of  questions 
before  which  all  others  must  sink  into  insignificance.  Not 
union  for  the  mere  sake  of  union — that  is  but  a  sectarian 
sneer  ; — but  union  as  the  very  heart  in  the  body  of  Christ  and 
crown  of  all  the  graces;  union  as  a  duty  no  less  than  as  a 
sentiment;  union  for  the  maintenance  of  truth  and  relisrion 
and  virtue ;  union  to  prevent  so  immense  a  waste  and  friction 
in  our  charities  and  missions;  union  for  the  preservation  of 
Christianity  itself  amid  dangers  hitherto  unknown ;  union 
against  the  materialism  that  is  corrupting  the  lifeof  the  nation  ; 
against  the  socialism  that  is  assailing  property,  marriage, 
government,  law,  and  order ;  against  the  agnosticism  that  is 
undermining  all  creeds,  codes,  and  manners  ;  against  the  sec- 
tarianism that  is  parleying  and  wrangling  in  full  view  of  such 
enemies  ;  union,  if  need  be,  against  the  very  disunion  that 
would  keep  the  churches,  as  it  would  have  kept  the  States, 
discordant  and  dismembered,  in  the  supreme  hour  of  peril. 

Signs  of  Church  Unity. 
Never  were  the  signs,  as  well  as  the  needs,  of  such  union 
more  apparent.  Never  was  the  feeling  so  deep  and  growing 
that  the  divisions  in  the  Christian  church  must  somehow 
come  to  an  end.  It  will  not  be  quenched  by  such  adjectives 
as  "  sentimental,"  "  romantic,"  "  Utopian."  Sectarian  interests 
may  throw  obstacles  in  the  way,  a  false  conservatism  may 
raise  alarms,  and  veteran  divines  draw  the  sword  to  ficrht  their 
battles  over  again, — but  in  vain.  In  this  movement  the 
people  are  more  determined  than  their  rulers,  and  the  church 
universal  will  prove  stronger  than  any  sect  or  party.  Look 
at  the  progress  made  since  the  question  was  opened  a  few 
months  ago.     The  chief  denominations  of  the  country  have 


54  Views  of  ChtiT'ch  Unity. 

been  taking  practical  steps  toward  church  unity  in  distinc- 
tion from  mere  Christian  union.  The  Congregational 
churches  of  New  England  have  been  removing  the  walls 
which  separate  Baptists  from  Pedobaptist  communions.  The 
Presbyterian  churches  of  the  Middle  States  have  been  settling 
the  vexed  question  of  their  psalmody,  while  those  of  the 
South  and  the  North  are  adjusting  their  political  differences, 
and  those  of  the  East  are  in  conference  with  the  Reformed 
churches,  Dutch  and  German.  The  Cumberland  Presby- 
terian and  Methodist  churches  of  the  West  are  blending  Cal- 
vinism with  Arminianism.  The  great  Lutheran  churches 
give  signs  of  becoming  more  homogeneous  and  American. 
The  Baptist  churches  have  declared  for  union  of  denomina- 
tions. The  Episcopal  church  has  been  inwardly  moved  as 
never  before  towards  other  Protestant  churches.  The  Evan- 
gelical Alliance  is  taking  the  form  of  a  national  league.  And 
as  a  visible  presage  of  the  new  era,  we  have  already  had  what 
might  be  called  a  provisional  Congress  of  the  "  United 
Churches  of  the  United  States." 

Proposals  of  the  American  Bishops. 

In  the  midst  of  these  remarkable  movements,  the  assem- 
bled Bishops  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  have  sent 
forth  a  noble  and  far-reaching  declaration  seeking  to  embrace 
all  branches  of  Christendom  in  the  bonds  of  a  true  church 
unity.  The  four  terms  proposed  are  so  large  and  fair  that 
they  will  almost  carry  consent  in  their  statement. 

First.  The  Holy  Scriptures  are  already  the  accepted  basis 
of  all  Christian  churches,  besides  affording  the  consensus  of 
Christianity  with  Judaism,  and  with  heathenism  in  the  work 
of  missions. 

Second.  The  Nicene  Creed  was  simply  the  faith  of  the 
undivided  early  church,  and  still  expresses  the  most  essential 
consensus  of  nearly  all  modern  churches,  with  room  for  their 
later  creeds,  such  as  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  the  West- 
minster, Augsburg,  and  Heidelberg  confessions. 


Proposals  of  the  A^nerican  Bishops.  55 

Third.  The  Gospel  Sacraments,  whenever  and  wherever 
rightly  administered,  cannot  but  exhibit  the  communion  of 
that  visible  Catholic  Church  which  includes  all  baptized 
Christians  and  their  children. 

Fourth.  The  Historic  Episcopate  might  become  an  added 
bond  among  existing  church  systems,  if  viewed  according 
to  the  meaning  of  the  phrase,  as  a  fact  rather  than  as  a 
doctrine,  without  raising  the  question  whether  it  has  been  a 
development  of  the  apostolate  or  of  the  presbyterate  of  the 
early  church. 

It  is  this  last  proposal  which  is  likely  to  stir  the  keenest 
debate,  and  all  eyes  are  now  turned  toward  this  one  point  as 
the  focus  of  the  discussion.  If  the  unifying  movement  is  to 
go  forward,  it  is  plain  that  it  should  be  led  and  guided  by 
those  churches  or  systems  which  are  historically  and  logically 
most  nearly  allied  in  doctrine,  polity,  and  worship,  as  well  as 
providentially  fitted  to  represent  the  Protestant  and  Catholic 
wines  of  Christendom.  Now  these  conditions  are  met  by 
Presbytery  and  Episcopacy  ;  by  Presbytery  as  included  in 
the  Lutheran,  Reformed,  Congregational,  Presbyterian,  and 
Methodist  churches;  and  by  Episcopacy  as  found  in  the 
Greek,  Latin,  Anglican,  and  Protestant  Episcopal  churches, 
— not  Presbytery  and  Episcopacy,  viewed  merely  as  comple- 
mental  institutions  in  an  ideal  polity,  but  also  as  kindred 
ecclesiastical  elements,  with  the  same  roots  in  Scripture  and 
in  History,  and  having  a  true  and  vital  affinity  for  each  other. 

Here  we  touch  the  embers  of  smouldering  controversies, 
which  a  breath  might  kindle  into  a  flame.  It  would  be  easy 
enough  to  recall  old  grievances  and  revive  dying  prejudices 
which  arose  in  another  age  and  country,  when  Presbyterians 
and  Episcopalians  made  martyrs  of  each  other  by  turns,  in  a 
fierce  and  sectarian  warfare,  until,  like  two  combatants 
chained  apart,  they  were  forced  by  the  civil  arm  to  settle  down 
into  the  established  churches  of  England  and  Scotland. 
There  are  those  who  would  be  in  haste  to  import  the  waning 
castes  of  churchman    and  dissenter   into  a  free  republic,  to 


56  Views  of  Church  Unity. 

apply  the  effete  policy  of  the  seventeenth  century  to  the  nine- 
teenth, and  to  measure  the  wants  of  a  hemisphere  by  those 
of  an  island.  But  the  large  hearts  and  noble  minds  on  both 
sides  will  resolutely  keep  dead  issues  out  of  sight,  will  rise 
above  sects  and  parties  to  the  view  of  general  and  lasting 
interests,  and  will  seek  to  minimize  their  trivial  differences  in 
order  to  gain  the  maximum  amount  of  sincere  and  honorable 
agreement. 

Historical  Relations  of  Presbytery  and  Episcopacy, 
Approaching  the  question  in  this  spirit,  we  shall  be  at  no 
loss  for  favorable  signs  and  arguments.  Not  only  do  the 
mother-churches  of  England  and  Scotland  bear  an  original 
likeness  as  twin  daughters  of  the  Reformation,  descended 
from  the  same  Catholic  church,  with  the  same  historical  con- 
tinuity from  the  apostles'  time,  and  only  different  lines  of  suc- 
cession since  they  parted ;  not  only  may  their  existing  stand- 
ards be  correlated  and  blended,  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
as  but  a  liturgical  expression  of  the  Directory  for  Public 
Worship,  the  Confession  of  Faith  as  but  a  logical  expansion 
of  the  Articles  of  Religion,  and  the  diocesan  Episcopate  as 
but  a  fit  complement  of  the  synodical  Presbytery, — but  besides 
all  this,  the  two  forms  of  polity,  as  transplanted  to  our  shores, 
have  developed  new  types  of  church  life  and  culture,  which 
would  be  especially  valuable  in  combination,  and  have  already 
become  leading  factors  in  our  Anglo-American  civilization, 
the  one  as  expressive  of  the  best  Protestant,  and  the  other  of 
the  most  Catholic  Christianity.  Add  still  further:  that  for  a 
hundred  years  past  they  have  been  unconsciously  coming 
together  and  growing  like  each  other.  At  the  very  outset, 
when  they  became  independent  of  the  mother-churches,  the 
American  Directory  was  enriched  with  liturgical  rules  and 
suggestions,  and  the  American  Ordinal  was  enlarged  by  an 
alternative  form  of  authorization.  Ever  since  then  American 
Presbyterianism  has  been  steadily  reacting  from  the  narrow 
views  of  the  Puritans  and  Covenanters  toward  a  larger  Chris- 


Reu7iio7i  of  Presbytery  and  Episcopacy.         57 

tian  culture  and  more  liturgical  mode  of  worship,  as  well  as 
producing  a  pure  theology  and  a  learned  ministry  unsurpassed 
in  the  country ;  while  American  Episcopacy,  having  escaped 
from  the  Anglican  establishment  with  a  Catholic  faith  and 
noble  liturgy,  has  been  admitting  presbyterial  government,  lay 
and  clerical,  into  its  dioceses  and  combining  extempore  prayers 
with  its  liturgy,  until  it  has  surrendered  the  very  points  on 
which  the  Presbyterian  party  in  the  Church  of  England  was 
defeated  two  centuries  ago.  We  have  lived  to  see  Episco- 
palian prayer-meetings  as  well  as  Presbyterian  prayer-books. 
The  two  hereditary  foes  have  not  merely  met  half-way,  but 
actually  crossed  the  Hnes  as  in  friendly  rivalry  on  the  battle- 
fields of  former  generations. 

Reunion  of  Presbytery  and  Episcopacy, 
Now  it  seems  worth  while  to  ask  if  the  ancient  family  feud 
might  not  somehow  be  effaced  and  forgotten.  Both  churches, 
after  long  estrangement,  have  come  back  to  ground  where 
they  may  well  recognize  and  respect  their  common  lineage, 
their  organic  likeness,  and  their  reciprocal  interests.  Both  of 
them,  in  fact,  have  long  since  conceded  enough,  and  more  than 
enough,  for  a  full  and  frank  understanding.  Had  such  con- 
cessions been  made  in  the  beginning,  no  separation  could 
have  occurred.  Were  such  concessions  now  more  generally 
known,  a  reunion  might  soon  follow.  Even  that  last  barrier 
to  reunion,  the  vexed  question  of  orders,  when  fairly  met  and 
sifted,  may  but  disclose  a  ground  or  link  of  organic  connec- 
tion in  the  one  simple  fact  that  Episcopal  ordination  could 
take  nothing  from,  but  only  add  something  to  Presbyterian 
ordination,  howsoever  either  may  be  viewed  by  either  party. 
Presbyterians  do  not  differ  from  Episcopalians  more  than 
Episcopalians  differ  from  one  another  in  estimating  that  rite. 
In  such  a  state  of  opinion  the  differences  are  no  longer  worth 
weighing  against  the  agreements  and  accruing  advantages. 
As  it  might  prove  a  great  gain  to  American  Episcopacy  to  be 


58  Views  of  Church  Unity. 

reenforced  with  Presbyterian  orthodoxy  and  churchliness, 
so  it  might  prove  a  great  gain  to  American  Presbytery  to 
recover  the  Episcopal  order  and  liturgy.  The  reunion  would 
be  as  organic  to  each  as  the  original  rupture  was  disorganiz- 
ing to  both.  Indeed,  it  could  easily  be  shown  that  the  chief 
authors  of  the  Presbyterian  standards,  if  now  living,  would 
find  their  ideal  in  our  Protestant  Episcopacy ;  or,  in  other 
words,  that  the  American  Episcopacy  of  to-day  has  recovered 
English  Presbytery  of  a  classic  type,  and  so  fully  recovered 
it  that  the  two  systems,  at  fit  times  and  places,  especially  in 
our  large  cities  and  great  missions,  might  wisely  and  well  be 
conjoined  or  confederated,  if  not  at  length  merged  in  one 
organization. 

How  far  such  union  or  fusion  is  now  feasible  need  not  here 
be  discussed.  Whatever  changes  of  church  law  or  practice 
might  be  needed,  the  way  to  them  could  be  found  as  soon  as 
there  is  the  will  to  find  them.  Presbyterian  usage  already 
concedes  the  validity  of  episcopal  ordination,  and  the  episco- 
pal Ordinal  enjoins  no  polemic  theory  of  presbyterial  ordina- 
tion, but  is  even  held  to  involve  presbyterial  coordination. 
Why  not  begin  at  once  to  act  upon  these  facts  and  principles  ? 
Why  should  there  be  a  so-called  hypothetical  ordination  on 
the  one  side  or  a  covert  conditional  acceptance  of  it  on  the 
other.  Let  both  parties  openly  and  generously  recognize 
each  other  in  concurrent  ordinations  or  reordinations,  as 
occasion  requires.  By  such  means  all  question  of  valid 
ministrations  would  at  length  die  out,  as  in  a  marriage  of 
rival  houses.  The  most  extreme  Episcopalian,  from  his  own 
point  of  view,  would  only  be  sanctioning  orthodox  learning, 
churchly  aims,  and  evangelical  labors  ;  and  the  most  extreme 
Presbyterian,  from  his  own  point  of  view,  would  only  be 
gaining  more  authority  or  grace  for  a  larger  service ;  and  the 
two  together  would  simply  be  honoring  both  episcopacy  and 
presbytery  in  the  one  catholic  and  apostolic  Church  of 
Christ. 


Adva7itages  of  Episcopacy.  59 

Advantages  of  Episcopacy. 

Without  claiming  to  speak  for  others,  but  looking  at  the 
question  from  a  strictly  undenominational  point  of  view,  I 
venture  to  hope  that  in  any  union  to  be  devised  the  historic 
episcopate  can  be  retained,  if  only  as  one  remaining  bulwark 
against  the  well-meant  but  lawless  evangelism  which  is  run- 
ning wild  in  our  churches  and  bringing  all  the  divine  institu- 
tions of  the  Christian  religion  into  contempt.  The  great 
revivalists,  Whitefield  and  Wesley,  were  trained  clergymen 
and  ever  appeared  as  such,  even  when  driven  from  the  pulpit 
into  the  field.  But  our  lay  evangelists  are  pressed  from  the 
field  into  the  pulpit,  and  a  divine  success  is  claimed  for  them 
on  the  very  ground  that  they  are  not  clergymen  but  mere 
laymen.  When  earnest  and  gifted  preachers  of  the  Gospel, 
like  Mr.  Moody,  decline  to  become  ordained  ministers  of 
any  church,  while  everywhere  exercising  ministerial  functions, 
with  learned  divines  and  faithful  pastors  sitting  at  their  feet, 
and  the  whole  order  of  God's  house  set  aside,  can  we  wonder 
if  the  popular  inference  should  be  that  the  ministry  itself  is 
but  a  human  convenience,  if  not  already  a  failure?  Is  any 
transient  good,  done  by  them,  to  be  weighed  for  one  moment 
against  the  lasting  evil  of  overthrowing  the  most  sacred 
ordinances  and  institutions,  to  say  nothing  of  feverish  excite- 
ments, whose  track  is  often  that  of  the  simoon  through  the 
fairest  pastures  of  Christ  ?  Our  chief  danger  in  this  land  and 
age  of  freedom  is  not  hierarchy.  Instead  of  too  much  eccle- 
siasticism,  there  is  too  little.  The  clergy  are  fast  losing  their 
normal  rank  and  influence.  The  time  may  yet  come  when 
pure  presbytery  and  true  episcopacy  shall  appear  not  only 
congruous  but  inseparable,  and  together  essential  in  main- 
taining that  "  catholic  visible  church  unto  which  Christ  hath 
given  the  ministry,  oracles,  and  ordinances  of  God." 

There  is  also  a  large  and  growing  class  of  minds  in  all 
churches  for  whom  the  historic  episcopate,  as  now  associated 
with  the  prayer-book,  seems  practically  the  only  guarantee 


6o  Views  of  Church  Unity. 

of  a  pure  scriptural  worship.  Time  was  indeed  when  that 
liturgy  had  been  so  rigorously  enforced  as  to  extinguish  all 
other  forms  of  devotion.  No  wonder  Milton  could  then  cry 
out  against  it :  "  To  imprison  and  confine  by  force,  within  a 
pin-fold  of  set  words,  those  two  most  unimprisonable  things, 
our  prayers  and  that  divine  spirit  of  utterance  which  moves 
them,  is  a  tyranny  that  would  want  longer  hands  than  those 
giants  who  threatened  bondage  to  heaven."  But  out  of  that 
tyranny  we  have  long  since  fought  our  way  to  a  ruinous 
victory.  The  time  has  now  come  to  distinguish  liberty  from 
license  in  the  worship  of  God,  and  to  assert  order  and  decency 
against  confusion  in  the  assemblies  of  saints.  Keep  for  fit 
times  and  places  the  free,  extempore  service  which  has  been 
so  dearly  won  ;  but  keep  also  that  historic  liturgy  which  has 
come  down  to  us  from  all  the  Christian  ages.  Let  the  people 
have  pure  English  and  sound  doctrine  at  least  in  their  devo- 
tions ;  let  them  learn  the  whole  word  of  God  in  appointed 
lessons ;  let  them  offer  up  prayers  which  they  can  call  their 
own;  let  them  follow  their  Lord,  from  his  cradle  to  his  cross, 
through  each  year  of  his  grace;  let  them  receive  holy  sacra- 
ments and  rites  in  the  meet  words  of  apostles,  saints,  and 
martyrs;  let  them  thus  worship  with  angels  and  archangels 
and  the  whole  company  of  the  redeemed  on  earth  and  in 
heaven.  Already,  indeed,  some  of  these  things  have  been 
reclaimed  for  them  as  their  just  heritage,  and  we  are  begin- 
ning to  find  that  the  prayer-book  can  co-exist  with  the  prayer- 
meeting  as  easily  as  episcopacy  can  concur  with  presbytery. 

Besides  these  advantages,  the  historic  episcopate  might 
also  bring  a  valuable  conservative  force  into  our  presbyterial 
systems  of  church  government.  Aside  from  the  claim  of 
apostolical  succession,  it  is  appreciated  as  a  spiritual  and 
ancient  institution  of  the  Christian  religion  as  fitted  to  secure 
the  choicest  wisdom,  learning,  and  piety  of  the  Church  in  the 
direction  of  its  affairs,  and  as  demanded  by  new  exigencies 
which  have  arisen  in  our  time  and  country.  Since  it  became 
detached  from  the  English  peerage  and    monarchy,  it   has 


Advantages  of  Episcopacy.  6i 

grown  into  harmony  with  our  Republican  institutions,  while 
supplying  needed  checks  upon  their  radical  tendencies. 
Moreover,  it  is  certain  that  Episcopacy  as  well  as  Presbytery 
would  have  a  voice  in  any  Provisional  Congress  or  General 
Council  of  the  Lutheran,  Reformed,  Congregational,  Presby- 
terian, Methodist,  and  Protestant  Episcopal  churches  which 
could  be  duly  called ;  and  should  the  time  ever  come  for  the 
federation  or  consolidation  of  these  bodies,  it  might  be  found 
that  a  House  of  Bishops  and  House  of  Presbyters,  like  the 
Senators  and  Representatives  in  our  National  legislature, 
would  support  and  balance  each  other,  reconciling  rival  claims 
and  interests,  and  ever  securing  the  new  popular  institutions 
of  the  American  church  as  well  as  keeping  it  in  the  line  of 
historic  Christianity.  He  would  be  a  bold  prophet  who  would 
strike  out  either  presbytery  or  episcopacy  from  the  future 
Christian  civilization  of  this  continent. 

The  chief  obstacles  to  a  reunion  of  our  episcopal  and  pres- 
byterial  systems  are  not  so  much  any  doctrinal  differences 
inhering  in  those  systems  as  the  mere  incidental  influences  of 
denominational  pride,  inherited  prejudice  and  general  ignor- 
ance— an  ignorance  largely  enveloping  the  clergy  as  well  as 
the  people.  Nothing  would  seem  plainer  than  that  both 
parties  left  their  grievances  behind  them  three  thousand  miles 
away,  two  hundred  years  ago ;  and  yet  the  memory  of  them 
so  rankles  in  our  blood  that  we  still  shudder  at  them  as  if  we 
might  encounter  another  Laud  in  some  good  bishop  of  an 
American  diocese,  or  provoke  some  Janet  Geddes  to  hurl  her 
tripod  in  response  to  a  Presbyterian  liturgy.  The  political, 
social,  and  religious  conditions  which  once  kindled  so  fierce  a 
strife  between  Presbytery  and  Episcopacy,  and  drove  them 
asunder  to  so  rash  extremes,  could  not  be  transferred  to  this 
free  land  and  can  never  arise  among  its  free  churches  ;  but  we 
seem  often  to  fancy  that  the  same  battle  is  still  raging,  and 
fill  the  air  with  the  old  familiar  slogans  and  cheer  on  our 
champions  to  new  encounters,  though  all  the  while  no  lordly 


62  Views  of  CJnirch  Unity. 

prelates  are  sitting  in  our  legislatures,  and  no  bloody  Claver- 
house  is  abroad  pursuing  our  peaceful  worshipers  ;  though 
no  psalm-singing  Puritans  are  despoiling  our  new  cathedrals 
and  no  outlawed  Covenanters  are  waylaying  our  excellent 
bishops.  Episcopalians  are  ever  boasting  of  a  church  lineage 
which  they  espoused  but  yesterday;  and  Presbyterians,  of  a 
line  of  martyrs  whom  they  no  longer  follow.  We  forget  that 
those  honored  Anglican  prelates  would  have  dispersed  our 
Episcopal  Conventions  as  so  many  rebels,  schismatics,  and 
dissenters,  "and  those  revered  Scottish  worthies  would  have 
made  swift  bonfires  of  our  Presbyterian  hymnals,  organs,  and 
service-books.  And  should  some  candid  investigator  expose 
to  us,  in  the  clear  light  of  history,  how  groundless  are  our 
prejudices  and  how  foolish  our  divisions,  we  can  do  nothing 
perhaps  but  accept  his  statements,  as  highly  interesting  but 
very  useless,  and  scarcely  know  whether  to  frown  or  smile 
upon  him  as,  by  turns,  he  provokes  admiration  or  indignation 
on  both  sides  of  the  question. 

The  writer  cannot  hope  to  escape  such  influences.  By 
some  of  his  most  respected  readers  this  paper  may  be  viewed 
as  a  pure  speculation.  It  will  be  easy  to  call  it  the  dream  of 
a  recluse,  or  say  that  the  time  is  not  ripe  for  it.  Neverthe- 
less, the  present  generation  might  see  it  becoming  real,  if  only 
events  move  forward  as  fast  as  they  have  moved  since  the 
former  paper  was  written.  And  no  prophet  is  needed  to  tell 
us  what  would  be  the  issue. 

Let  the  day  ever  come  for  a  general  reunion  of  Presbytery 
and  Episcopacy,  either  by  formal  agreement  or  by  practical 
fusion,  and  it  would  mark  the  turning  point  in  the  problem 
of  an  American  Catholic  Church.  It  would  be  but  the  form- 
ing nucleus  of  a  wide  confederation  and  consolidation  of 
churches  and  denominations,  which  are  already  in  ministerial 
communion  and  more  or  less  organic  connection.  Presbytery 
would  include  the  German,  Dutch,  French,  Scotch,  and  Eng- 
lish type   of  Protestantism ;   Episcopacy  would  involve  the 


Advantages  of  Episcopacy.  63 

Greek,  Latin,  Anglican,  and  American  germs  of  Catholicity; 
and  all  these  varied  elements  acquiring  fresh  vigor  would 
come  into  new  and  vital  relations,  correcting  and  molding  each 
other.  Our  best  American  Christianity  would  react  upon  our 
whole  American  civilization  against  the  crying  evils  of  sec- 
tarianism, infidelity,  and  vice.  The  great  vanguard  churches 
of  the  land,  no  longer  idly  saying  one  to  another  in  the  very 
front  of  battle,  "  I  have  no  need  of  thee,"  would  stand  com- 
pact together,  and  grow  up  in  Christ  the  Head  as  his  living 
members,  and  at  length,  it  may  be,  lead  on  to-^;;^  United 
Church  of  the  United  States. 


III. 

THE  FOUR  ARTICLES  OF  CHURCH 

UNITY. 


III. 

THE  FOUR  ARTICLES  OF  CHURCH  UNITY. 

It  has  been  said  that  the  greatest  wonder  of  the  World's 
Fair  was  its  Parhament  of  Religions.  It  put  upon  exhibition 
not  merely  the  principal  Heathen  beliefs,  but  the  various 
Christian  denominations,  with  champions  rehearsing  their 
claims.  Whether  it  shall  pass  away  like  another  Babel  or 
open  a  new  Pentecost,  depends  upon  the  use  now  made  of 
its  lessons.  And  its  chief  lesson  was  not  the  supremacy  of 
Christianity,  which  required  no  proof;  but  the  absolute  need 
of  harmony  and  unity  in  order  to  establish  its  supremacy 
throughout  the  earth.  Let  that  lesson  go  unheeded,  and  the 
Christian  Religion  may  only  have  exposed  its  weakness  in 
the  face  of  its  enemies.  Henceforth  the  conquest  of  heathen- 
ism, as  well  as  the  maintenance  of  civilization,  will  demand 
more  than  ever  the  reunion  of  Christendom. 

Let  us  approach  this  momentous  question,  as  far  as  we  may, 
with  strict  definitions  and  clear  conceptions.  While  such 
preliminaries  are  essential  to  all  good  thinking  and  sound 
opinion,  they  are  especially  needful  in  dealing  with  so  difficult 
a  problem  as  Church  unity,  and  one  already  so  beclouded 
with  vague  terms  and  specious  phrases.  Several  distinctions 
are  to  be  premised  and  maintained  throughout  the  inquiry. 

Church  Unity  Defined. 
First  of  all.  Church  unity  should  be  distinguished  from 
Christian  unity  or  the  oneness  of  believers  in  Christ.  There 
is  a  sense  in  which  all  Christians  are  one  already,  and  one 
simply  because  they  are  Christians.  They  are  one  in  the 
unity  of  the  spirit.     They  are  spiritually  united  to  Christ  by 

67 


68  The  Four  Articles  of  Church  Unity. 

faith  and  love  as  branches  of  one  vine  and  members  of  one 
body.  They  thus  form  one  holy  brotherhood,  one  mystical 
fellowship,  one  communion  of  saints,  the  world  over.  This 
one  invisible  Church,  as  it  is  often  called,  persists  in  and 
through  all  visible  churches  and  denominations,  survives  their 
mutations  and  destructions,  and  remains  intact  even  amid 
their  conflicts  and  schisms.  And  it  cannot  be  too  highly 
exalted  in  the  present  discussion.  That  we  are  all  one  in 
Christ  is  an  admitted  fact  from  which  we  proceed,  and  the 
common  ground  upon  which  we  stand.  Without  it  we  could 
not  even  consider  the  question  before  us.  But  while  Christian 
unity  is  thus  to  be  held  as  the  condition  precedent  to  church 
unity  it  is  not  church  unity  itself  By  a  vague  figure  of 
speech  it  is  sometimes  confounded  with  church  unity,  and 
even  miscalled  organic  unity  in  allusion  to  a  metaphorical 
organism  ;  but  in  a  strict  sense  it  can  only  be  applied  to  the 
spiritual  fellowship  of  saints  or  invisible  church.  Neverthe- 
less this  invisible  church  ever  becomes  more  or  less  visible 
in  organic  form  and  strives  to  manifest  its  oneness.  It  can 
no  more  exist  without  an  organism  or  an  organization  than 
the  soul  without  the  body.  Organization,  if  not  essential  to 
its  very  being,  is  at  least  indispensable  and  of  divine  origin 
and  warrant.  The  institutions  of  Christianity,  its  ministry 
and  sacraments,  are  revealed  in  the  Scriptures,  no  less  than 
its  doctrines.  In  fact,  but  for  its  institutions  we  should  have 
had  neither  its  Scriptures  nor  yet  its  doctrines.  As  a  bare 
Gospel,  apart  from  the  church,  it  might  have  died  out  in  the 
first  century,  with  no  more  echo  in  history  than  the  teachings 
of  Socrates  or  the  morals  of  Seneca.  It  became,  however,  a 
compact  organization  in  the  midst  of  pagan  society,  with  its 
sacraments  and  its  Scriptures;  and  it  continued  thus  compact 
and  undivided  for  some  centuries  afterward.  In  that  one 
Catholic  Apostolic  Church  we  have  an  example  and  model 
of  church  unity,  not  only  as  consistent  with  Christian  unity 
but  as  expressing  and  maintaining  it.  Indeed,  it  is  only  in 
and  through  such  church  unity  that  Christian  unity  can  find 


Federation  of  Churches.  69 

due  and  full  expression.  Without  such  unity  it  must  remain 
as  a  vague  ideal  or  crude  sentiment,  if  it  be  not  made  a  mere 
pretext  for  schism  and  excuse  for  sectarianism.  The  most 
factious  sectaries  are  sometimes  loudest  in  their  appeals  to 
the  Christian  unity  which  they  have  defied  and  obscured,  yet 
cannot  destroy.  Never  let  it  be  forgotten  that  Christian 
unity,  spiritual  oneness;  already  exists  as  a  divine  fundamental 
fact  in  the  churches ;  and  the  real  problem  is,  how  to  express 
this  Christian  unity  in  an  organic  church  unity  which  shall 
exhibit  the  mystical  body  of  Christ  as  no  longer  mutilated 
and  distracted,  but  with  its  various  members  in  normal  exer- 
cise and  conscious  harmony. 

Federation  of  Churches. 
Church  unity  should  also  be  distinguished  from  Church 
union  or  the  federation  of  denominations.^  The  different 
Christian  bodies  in  our  country  have  often  become  externally 
conjoined  without  internal  modification  or  concession,  some- 
what as  sovereign  states  form  leagues  and  compacts.  Under 
the  impulse  of  common  aims  and  the  pressure  of  common 
dangers  they  have  been  combined  in  Bible  and  Tract  Societies, 
in  Sunday-school  Unions,  in  Boards  of  Domestic  and  For- 
eign Missions,  and  in  various  associations  for  promoting 
temperance,  purity,  charity,  peace,  and  other  Christian  virtues. 
Such  coalitions,  though  purely  superficial  and  transient, 
besides  furthering  the  good  ends  in  view,  have  served  to 
demonstrate  an  essential  agreement  amid  the  general  diver- 
sity. We  have  also  had  examples  of  a  more  organic  union 
of  denominations,  based  upon  affinity  in  doctrine,  polity,  and 
worship,  such  as  the  recent  federation  of  the  different  Aneli- 
can  bodies  in  Canada.  In  some  cases  divided  Churches 
have   been    reunited,  as    when   the    Old   and    New    School 


1  It  should  be  premised  that,  throughout  this  essay,  the  word  "denomination" 
■will  be  used  in  the  legal  sense  (see  Preface  of  the  Prayer-book),  as  applicable 
alike  to  all  Christian  bodies,  Catholic  or  Protestant,  whatever  may  be  their 
ecclesiastical  claims  or  merits. 


yo  The  Four  Articles  of  Church  Unity. 

Presbyterian  Churches  again  became  one  ecclesiastical  body. 
The  Methodist  Episcopal  and  Protestant  Methodist  churches 
were  merged  together  in  the  same  manner.  At  first  sight  this 
would  seem  to  be  a  most  hopeful  field  in  which  to  labor  for 
church  unity.  Why  should  the  Protestant  Episcopal  and 
Reformed  Episcopal  churches  remain  apart  after  the  Chicago 
Declaration  ?  Why  do  not  the  Dutch  and  German  Re- 
formed churches  come  together,  when  they  are  so  much 
alike  that  it  is  hard  to  tell  one  from  the  other  ?  What  should 
hinder  the  great  Methodist  churches,  Northern  and  Southern, 
or  the  Presbyterian  churches,  North  and  South,  from  reunit- 
ing as  one  church  since  we  are  under  one  government  ? 
Might  not  the  different  Lutheran  Synods  and  Councils  be 
colligated  ?  Could  not  the  large  family  of  Baptist  denomina- 
tions be  at  least  confederated  ?  Is  there  anything  in  the 
claims  of  local  autonomy  to  forbid  a  more  organic  union  of 
Congregational  churches  ?  Ought  not  the  chief  denomina- 
tions thus  to  unite  in  kindred  groups  ?  And  then,  on  the 
basis  of  such  special  unions,  why  not  build  up  a  general 
confederation  in  some  grand  national  council  of  denominations, 
a  sort  of  Congress  of  the  United  Churches  of  the  United 
States,  having  its  Senate  of  Bishops  as  the  conservative  ele- 
ment, and  its  House  of  Presbyters  as  the  progressive  element, 
with  its  ratio  of  Congregational  representation  and  its  legisla- 
tion restricted  to  domestic  charities  and  foreign  missions  ? 
What  a  magnificent  spectacle  would  such  an  ecclesiastical 
confederacy  present  to  the  rest  of  Christendom  !  How  it 
would  shine  like  a  constellation  in  the  firmament  of  the  Uni- 
versal Church  !  The  bare  mention  of  it  is  inspiring  and  ele- 
vating. But  the  bare  mention  also  shows  it  to  be  crude  and 
visionary.  At  the  first  touch  of  analysis  the  nebulous 
splendor  dissolves  into  the  stars  of  which  it  is  composed. 
Confederation  is  not  unification.  It  is  but  a  mechanical  union 
of  social  bodies,  not  their  chemical  fusion  and  vital  growth. 
It  has  twice  proved  a  failure  in  our  political  history;  first, 
when  it  could  not  hold  the  United  States  together,  and  after- 


Assimilation  of  Denominations.  7 1 

ward  when  it  strove  to  tear  them  apart.  There  could  be  no 
perfect  union  of  churches  or  of  states,  without  some  mutual 
concession  of  sovereignty,  some  submission  to  common 
authority,  some  agreement  in  essential  opinions.  At  its  best 
estate,  on  its  face,  denominational  confederation  is  but  masked 
denominationalism,  and  a  mere  temporary  expedient,  carrying 
its  own  dissolution  with  it.  Often  it  is  only  a  truce  in  mid 
battle,  or  patching  of  old  family  quarrels.  If  it  serve  as  a 
first  step  toward  church  unity  it  cannot  be  the  last  one,  but 
must  advance  or  else  recoil  with  fresh  estrangement  and 
harsh  assertion  of  sectarian  prejudice  worse  than  before. 
First  or  last,  whatever  else  it  may  be,  it  is  not  church  unity. 

Assimilation  of  Denominations. 
Church  unity  should  be  distinguished  still  further  from 
Church  uniformity  or  the  assimilation  of  denominations. 
This  is  the  other  extreme  from  federation.  It  would  efface 
denominational  distinctions  and  reduce  all  Christian  bodies  to 
one  type  of  doctrine,  polity,  and  worship.  It  is  a  process 
which  seems  to  have  been  long  going  on  in  our  country.  The 
Churches  of  the  Old  World  as  transferred  to  the  New,  and 
compacted  together  under  one  political  system,  have  been 
growing  like  each  other  through  social  intercourse  and  uncon- 
scious imitation.  Protestants  have  been  reviving  the  Catholic 
sisterhood  and  fraternity  under  new  names  and  guises  ;  while 
Catholics  are  resorting  to  the  Protestant  platform  and  news- 
paper in  their  conflicts  and  troubles.  Episcopalians  have 
restored  Presbyterian  elements  to  their  polity  and  extempore 
prayers  to  their  liturgy;  while  Presbyterians  are  recovering 
Episcopal  agencies  of  administration  and  liturgical  modes  of 
worship.  Both  Presbyterians  and  Episcopalians  have  learned 
something  from  the  Methodist  revival ;  while  Methodists  have 
learned  to  have  choirs  and  divinity  schools  as  well  as  camp- 
meetings  and  lay  preachers.  Lutherans,  Congregationalists, 
Baptists,  in  like  manner,  are  taking  on  all  the  hues  of  the 
Church  year  and  ritual.     At  first  sight  there  might  seem  to  be 


72  The  Four  Articles  of  Church  Unity. 

no  limit  to  such  assimilation.  We  are  ready  to  fancy  the  de- 
nominations blending  into  a  sort  of  composite  likeness.  But 
on  closer  view  the  superficial  resemblances  vanish,  and  the  old 
essential  differences  assert  themselves.  Each  will  be  found 
prizing  more  the  distinction  which  it  keeps  than  the  differences 
which  it  has  effaced.  And  such  distinctions  cannot  and 
should  not  be  wholly  obliterated.  Absolute  uniformity  is  not 
possible  either  in  the  world  of  nature  or  of  grace.  According 
to  the  chosen  metaphors  of  Scripture,  the  Church  is  one  vine, 
but  with  different  branches;  one  body,  but  with  various  mem- 
bers ;  one  building,  but  of  composite  structure.  In  political 
society  we  see  the  greatest  variety  of  classes,  parties,  and 
opinions  ;  aristocratic,  democratic,  republican,  socialist,  popu- 
list ;  no  one  of  them  absorbing  or  exterminating  the  rest.  As 
little  in  religious  society  may  we  hope  to  find  all  Christians  at 
once  becoming  Baptists,  or  Congregationalists,  or  Methodists, 
or  Presbyterians,  or  Episcopalians,  or  Romanists.  Much  less 
could  they  be  made  alike  by  any  civil  or  ecclesiastical  process. 
The  experiment  of  enforced  uniformity  has  been  tried  for 
several  hundred  years  in  Episcopal  England  and  Presbyterian 
Scotland,  with  only  a  brood  of  non-conforming  sects  growing 
up  around  both  establishments.  The  same  lesson  is  taught  us 
here  by  the  conflict  of  usage  with  rubrics,  by  the  disuse  of 
directories,  and  by  the  rise  of  heresy  under  the  strictest  creeds 
and  confessions.  All  experience  shows  that  a  rigid  uniformity 
in  doctrine  and  ritual  could  only  breed  dissent  and  schism, 
and  issue  in  renewed  failure.  Were  it  attained,  instead  of  pro- 
moting Church  unity,  it  would  destroy  it. 

The  definition  of  a  true  Church  unity  is  now  before  us.  It 
would  not  ignore  our  common  Christianity,  but  would  more 
fully  express  and  maintain  it.  It  would  not  undervalue 
denominational  confederation,  but  would  look  beyond  it  to  a 
more  perfect  union  of  denominations.  It  would  not  obliterate 
denominational  peculiarities,  or  sacrifice  them  to  a  cast-iron 
uniformity,  but  it  would  legitimate,  subordinate,  and  readjust 
them  in  one  large  ecclesiastical  system  as  different  members 


False  Deiiomifiatioiialism.  'j-r^ 

knit  together  in  the  one  living  body  of  Christ.     In  a  word,  it 
would  maintain  unity  in  variety  as  well  as  variety  in  unity. 

False  Ecclesiasticism. 

At  this  point  we  shall  be  met  by  several  objections  which 
must  be  cleared  out  of  the  way  before  we  can  proceed.  It  will 
be  said  that  Church  unity  tends  to  ecclesiasticism.  History 
will  be  invoked  to  warn  us  against  any  renewed  compact  of 
denominations  as  involving  the  latent  evils  of  churchly  power 
and  state  religion.  But  history  does  not  repeat  itself,  where 
the  conditions  are  changed  ;  nor  do  revolutions  ever  go  back- 
ward. The  dread  of  priestcraft  which  once  had  fitness  in 
European  countries  has  no  place  in  modern  civilization, 
though  it  may  linger  as  an  inherited  prejudice  in  some  of  our 
popular  discussions  and  partisan  appeals.  With  the  pope  him- 
self little  more  than  a  state  prisoner  at  Rome,  any  supremacy 
of  the  papacy  in  international  politics  has  become  a  dead  issue. 
With  the  Anglican  and  Scottish  establishments  already 
doomed  and  waning,  any  domination  of  prelacy  or  presbytery 
in  our  political  affairs  is  but  the  ghost  of  a  dead  issue.  And 
to  imagine  the  wrangling  sects  of  this  country  combining  to 
seize  the  United  States  Government  and  convert  it  into  a 
theocracy  is  to  imagine  a  species  of  ecclesiasticism  which 
cannot  be  stated  without  showing  its  intrinsic  absurdity.  Let 
us  not  be  frightened  by  the  mere  word  "  ecclesiasticism."  The 
real  dangers  which  threaten  us  are  not  in  the  ecclesiastical 
sphere,  but  in  the  political  or  social  sphere  ;  not  in  the  hier- 
archy of  the  dead  past,  but  in  the  anarchy  of  the  living  pre- 
sent. And  against  such  dangers  Church  unity  simply  means 
the  mustering  together  of  our  common  Christianity  in  defence 
of  our  common  civilization. 

False  Denominationalism. 

There  is  a  kindred  objection,  that  Church  unity  would 
destroy  the  witness-bearing  character  of  the  denominations. 
At  their  origin  each  of  them  had  some  high  mission  to  fulfil, 


74  The  Four  Aidides  of  CJmrcJi  Unity. 

some  great  problem  to  solve,  some  special  doctrine  or  princi- 
ple to  uphold.     The  Lutheran  and  the  Huguenot  protested 
against  the  papacy.     The  Covenanter  made  a  solemn  league 
against  prelacy.     The  Puritan  fled  away  from  a  false  ecclesi- 
asticism  into  the  wilderness.     The  Methodist  broke  the  bonds 
of  formalism  with  a  pentecostal  revival.     These  are  not  small 
achievements,  to  be  lightly  esteemed  or  rashly  put  in  peril. 
Granting  them,  however,  it  remains  to  ask,  whether  by  this 
time  such  denominational  missions  have  not  been  sufficiently 
accomplished,  and    whether  in    this    country    they   are    any 
longer  in  place.     Why  continue  mere  Protestants  in  a  land 
where  Roman  CathoHcism  is  coming  under  American  influ- 
ences   if  not   already    in   the   ordeal  of  reformation;    mere 
Covenanters,   where   Episcopacy  has    long   since    conceded 
nearly  everything  for   which   the  Presbyterian  party  in  the 
church   of  England  contended ;   mere  Puritans,   where  the 
lost  ideal  of  the   church    is   coming  back  into  the  Puritan 
consciousness  ;  or  mere  revivalists,  where  even  orthodoxy  and 
ritualism  are  leavened  with  Methodist  usages  and  influences. 
Would  it  not  be  better  to  bring  together  such  denominational 
types   as  complementary   traits  of  Christian    character,  and 
harmonize  such  denominational  claims  as  rival   schools   or 
tendencies  in  one  church  system?     As  expressed  in  diverse 
organizations  called  churches,  they  become  frightfully  exag- 
gerated ;   they  tend  to  obscure  or   mutilate  more  essential 
truths;  and  they  lead  to  immense  waste,  loss,  and  conflict  in 
all  missionary  and  humanitarian  efforts.     Whereas  the  same 
different  beliefs  and  usages  as  tolerated  in  one  organization  or 
in  one  church  would  retire  from  public  view  ;    would  sink 
into  due  relative  insignificance  ;  would  modify  and  check  one 
another;  and  would  render  both  missions  and  charities  more 
compact  and  efficient.     There  is,  in  fact,  no  good  thing  for 
which  the  denominationalist  pleads,  which  in  such  a  system 
might  not  be  retained,  while  much  sin  and  evil  that  he  laments 
would  be  avoided.     Church  unity,  it  has  been  aptly  said,  is 
"not  anti-denominational  but  super-denominational." 


Feasibility  of  Church  Unity.  75 

Feasibility  of  Church  Unity. 
The  most  practical  objection  is,  that  church  unity,  however 
desirable  in  itself,  is  not  feasible.  Often  it  is  accepted  as  a 
"  pium  desiderium,"  a  consummation  devoutly  to  be  wished, 
but  not  to  be  actually  sought  after ;  and  sometimes  its  advo- 
cates are  only  pitied  as  amiable  visionaries.  Against  such 
skepticism  stands  not  merely  the  scriptural  ideal  of  one 
church  but  all  analogy  and  much  experience.  Take  the 
analogy  of  living  nature.  As  we  ascend  the  organic  scale, 
from  the  mollusk  up  to  the  mammal,  rank  above  rank,  species 
after  species,  we  find  increasing  unity  amid  increasing  variety, 
the  more  complex  the  more  compact  the  structure,  until  at 
the  summit  in  man,  as  naturalists  tell  us,  all  inferior  organisms 
are  recapitulated  as  many  members  in  one  body,  and  set 
forth  as  the  very  masterpiece  of  creation.  And  what  God 
has  wrought  in  the  kingdom  of  nature,  shall  He  not  yet 
work  out  in  the  kingdom  of  grace  ?  Take  the  nearer  analogy 
of  political  society.  In  our  own  country,  during  less  than 
two  centuries,  we  have  seen  the  most  varied  nationalities, 
English,  French,  Dutch,  Spanish  ;  in  the  most  varied  climates. 
Northern,  Southern,  Eastern,  Western  ;  with  the  most  varied 
creeds,  Catholic,  Huguenot,  Puritan,  Cavalier,  Covenanter; 
under  the  most  varied  governments,  theocratic,  monarchic, 
aristocratic,  democratic,  all  together  emerging  at  length  as 
the  United  States  with  the  realized  motto,  "  E  pluribus 
Unum."  And  what  worldly  men  have  done  in  their  political 
relations,  cannot  Christian  men  do  in  their  religious  relations? 
Go  back  to  the  experience  of  early  Christian  society.  In 
that  first  organization  of  the  church  we  see  congregational, 
presbyterial,  episcopal  institutions,  but  no  separate  Episco- 
palian, Presbyterian,  and  Congregationalist  denominations 
with  the  apostles  in  one,  the  presbyters  in  another,  and  a  few 
synagogues  in  the  third.  We  find  various  schools  of  doctrine 
as  distinct  as  those  of  Luther,  Calvin,  and  Arminius,  but  no 
PauHne,  Petrine,  and  Johannean  churches  so-called,  unchurch- 


76  The  Four  Articles  of  Church  Unity. 

ing  one  another  for  a  dogma  or  a  rite.  On  the  contrary,  we 
behold  all  our  unhappy  divisions  dwelling  together  in  one 
undivided  Apostolic  Church.  And  what  the  church  has  been 
once,  may  it  not  become  again  ?  Look  abroad  in  Christian 
society  now.  Every  denomination  is  asserting  unity  against 
diversity.  The  Baptists  and  the  Congregationalists,  in  spite 
of  their  localism,  would  become  national  and  comprehensive. 
The  Lutherans,  the  Presbyterians,  the  Methodists  would  be 
called  churches  "  of  the  United  States."  The  Reformed 
would  be  no  longer  Dutch  or  German.  The  Protestant 
Episcopalians  would  drop  their  very  name  from  the  title  of 
the  church.  The  Catholics  would  show  themselves  American 
as  well  as  Roman.  All,  in  one  form  or  another,  have  before 
them  the  ideal  of  one  American  Cathohc  Church. 

The  New  Promise  of  Church  Unity. 
I  do  not  forget  the  past  experiments  in  Church  unity.  Has 
not  the  Western  church  for  twelve  centuries  been  vainly  try- 
ing to  make  peace  with  the  Eastern  church?  Did  not  the 
Eastern  church  refuse  to  make  peace  with  the  Reformed 
churches  ?  Could  the  Reformed  churches  even  make  peace 
among  themselves  ?  Were  popes,  prelates,  and  presbyteries 
successful  in  securing  uniformity  or  conformity  among  the 
churches  of  England,  Scotland,  and  Ireland  ?  Have  the  numer- 
ous eirenicons  since  devised  by  large-hearted  ecclesiastics  like 
Usher,  Leighton,  Pusey,  Muhlenberg  proved  any  more  suc- 
cessful ?  Why  follow  in  the  train  of  these  dismal  failures  ? 
For  a  twofold  reason :  first,  because  it  is  only  through  re- 
peated failures  that  we  can  pass  to  ultimate  success ;  and  also, 
because  former  causes  of  failure  are  dying  out  in  our  age  and 
country.  Geographical  barriers  to  unity  have  disappeared. 
The  Eastern  and  Western  churches,  the  German,  French, 
English,  and  Scottish  churches,  are  here  compacted  together 
within  one  territory  and  fusing  into  one  nationality.  Political 
barriers  have  disappeared.  The  temporal  power  of  the  Pope, 
the  civil  establishment  of  prelacy  and  presbytery,  have  given 


The   Claim  of  the  Histoi'ic  Churches.  j^j 

place  to  free  churches  in  a  free  land,  conspiring  under  one 
government  with  one  patriotic  aim.  Dogmatic  barriers  are 
disappearing.  Lutheranism,  Calvinism,  Arminianism,  by  their 
own  attritions,  concessions,  and  revisions  are  approaching  one 
common  faith  and  ritual.  At  the  same  time,  powerful  causes 
of  unity  are  working.  Democratic  influences  are  undermin- 
ing the  walls  of  mere  Romanism.  A  papal  theocracy  has 
humbled  monarchies,  and  subdued  aristocracies,  but  never 
has  it  conquered  a  democracy  ;  and  out  of  such  a  conflict  it 
could  only  emerge  itself  conquered.  Social  influences  are 
consolidating  Protestantism,  The  Huguenot,  the  Puritan,  the 
Cavalier,  the  Covenanter  have  been  intermarrying  for  several 
generations,  until  now  he  who  fights  unity  will  have  war  in 
his  own  household.  Religious  influences  are  working.  The 
spirit  of  unity  itself  is  seizing  the  Christian  masses  like  a  pas- 
sion, and  carrying  their  wrangling  leaders  along  with  them  as 
with  the  might  of  a  revolution.  Never  before  in  any  Chris- 
tian century,  nowhere  else  in  any  Christian  country,  have  all 
the  conditions  been  so  favorable  for  realizing  the  long-lost 
ideal  of  one  Holy  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church. 

In  order  to  keep  this  discussion  within  the  region  of  facts, 
two  principles  are  important,  the  one  as  to  the  scope,  and  the 
other  as  to  the  basis  of  unity.  The  first  is  that  a  true  church 
unity  must  include  all  existing  churches  within  its  scope.  Its 
horizon  must  be  as  wide  as  Christendom,  and  its  point  of  view 
must  be  taken  in  the  midst  of  the  churches  and  not  within  the 
narrow  pale  of  any  of  them.  Otherwise  we  shall  lose  sight 
of  large  portions  of  the  Christian  world,  or  only  seek  to  unify 
some  portions  against  the  others. 

The  Claim  of  the  Historic  Churches. 

First  of  all,  we  must  take  into  our  view  the  great  historic 
churches  which  have  come  down  to  us  from  the  Apostles'  time. 
It  is  hard  to  believe  that  the  devil  has  governed  the  Christian 
Church  for  twenty  centuries.     We  shall  fly  in  the  face  of  uni- 


78  The  Four  Articles  of  Church  Unity. 

versal  Providence  if  we  try  to  date  the  Christian  era  from  the 
Diet  of  Worms,  or  to  close  it  at  the  Council  of  Nice.  The 
divine  work  of  the  Universal  Church  is  not  to  be  tossed  aside 
as  mere  ecclesiasticism,  that  a  few  Christians  at  this  late  day- 
may  build  it  all  over  again.  The  Eastern  Greek  Church  and 
the  Western  Latin  Church  have  existed  and  still  exist  by  the 
grace  of  God,  as  well  as  the  modern  Protestant  Church  or  the 
latest  Christian  meeting  that  is  called  a  church.  Nor  can  we 
belittle  their  connection  with  the  question  as  sentimental, 
academic,  chimerical,  or  in  any  sense  foreign  to  us.  I  do 
not  refer  merely  to  the  few  Greek  congregations  among  us, 
on  our  eastern  and  western  shores.  Politically  we  are  in  the 
same  boat  with  at  least  eight  million  Roman  Catholic  fellow- 
citizens  ;  and  sooner  or  later  we  may  have  to  unite  with  them 
against  the  combined  terrors  of  mutiny  and  shipwreck  ;  in 
plainer  words,  against  sectarianism  and  infidelity.  As  fast  as 
that  great  spiritual  organization  under  the  plastic  force  of  its 
new  American  environment  sheds  its  Romanism  and  becomes 
simply  American,  national,  and  patriotic,  will  it  prove  an  im- 
mense gain  to  our  common  Christianity  as  well  as  a  safeguard 
to  our  common  country.  Already  it  is  practically  with  us  on 
the  great  moral  questions  of  the  day,  bringing  its  rank  and 
file  as  a  compact  fighting  mass  into  the  battle  with  social  vice 
and  sin.  It  is  true,  the  Filioqiie  in  the  Nicene  Creed  and  the 
dogma  of  papal  infallibility  are  present  barriers  to  unity.  But 
it  is  also  true  that  reforming  influences  are  at  work,  for  which 
due  allowance  must  be  made.  It  remains  to  be  seen  whether 
existing  obstacles  may  not  be  reduced  to  a  dead  letter  or  dis- 
appear in  the  unifying  process.  Moreover,  it  is  a  duty  to 
make  the  terms  of  fraternity  broad  enough  to  embrace  even 
those  who  erect  barriers  against  it.  Theoretically  at  least,  if 
not  as  yet  practically,  the  Greek  and  Latin  communions  must 
be  included  with  the  Anglican  and  American  in  any  scheme 
of  true  church  unity. 


The   Claim  of  the  Reformed  Churches.  79 

The  Claim  of  the  Reformed  Churches. 

At  the  same  time  we  must  not  wholly  exclude  from  such  a 
scheme  the  less  historic  churches  which  date  from  the 
Reformation,  or  even  the  denominations  which  have  followed 
in  their  train.  Protestantism,  for  all  its  faults,  cannot  be  reck- 
oned a  sheer  mistake  and  failure.  No  less  than  Catholicism, 
it  has  the  reason  of  its  existence  in  divine  providence  and  its 
warrant  in  a  divine  success.  For  four  centuries  it  has  been 
making  a  history  of  its  own.  The  Congregationalist,  Baptist, 
and  Methodist  communions,  though  detached  from  the  his- 
toric church,  have  largely  restored  the  primitive  Christianity. 
The  Lutheran  and  Reformed  churches  claim  to  have  renewed 
the  historic  church,  not  to  have  destroyed  it,  retaining  its 
creeds  and  portions  of  its  ritual.  The  Church  of  Scotland, 
as  by  law  established,  declared  it  had  been  "  reformed  from 
popery,  not  by  prelates,  but  by  presbyters  as  the  only  suc- 
cessors left  by  Christ  and  his  apostles  in  the  Church  ;  "  and 
to-day  it  has  its  own  Catholic  revival  of  ritual,  as  distinct 
from  Oxford  as  from  Rome,  and  by  no  means  what  is  vulgarly 
termed  among  us  "aping  the  Episcopalians."  Now,  even  the 
straitest  Protestant  Episcopal  churchman,  who  looks  upon 
such  bodies  around  him  as  pseudo-ecclesiastical  or  quasi- 
ecclesiastical  sects  having  no  right  to  the  name  of  churches, 
must  recognize  among  them  certain  ecclesiastical  institutions, 
or  ecclesiastical  theories,  or  ecclesiastical  aspirations,  tending 
toward  his  own  ecclesiastical  system,  together  with  acknowl- 
edged Christian  methods  and  benefits  which  might  well  be 
legitimated  and  included  within  his  own  system.  He  would 
not  deny  their  value  merely  as  training-schools.  Nor  can  he 
any  longer,  in  this  country  at  least,  claim  a  monopoly  of  the 
culture  and  taste  which  once  made  the  Anglican  church  a 
social  caste  in  little  sympathy  with  surrounding  Christianity. 
Among  liturgical  denominations  the  prayer-book  itself  is 
ceasing  to  act  as  a  social  distinction.  Other  less  cultured 
denominations  may  still  hold  doctrines  of  the  church  and 


8o  The  Fo2cr  Articles  of  Church  Unity. 

sacraments  which  are  hindrances  to  unity.  But  the  most 
independent  of  Independents  are  not  beyond  the  reach  of 
churchly  influences  and  unifying  impulses.  Many  of  the 
Baptists  favor  open  communion ;  and  some  Unitarians  would 
object  less  to  the  Nicene  Creed  than  Greek  Churchmen.  In 
the  long  future,  the  extreme  left  wing  of  Protestantism  as  well 
as  the  extreme  right  wing  of  Catholicism  may  yet  react  toward 
the  center.  Neither  should  be  cast  outside  the  pale  of  Chris- 
tian fraternity.  In  a  word,  if  we  would  deal  with  all  the  facts, 
we  must  somehow  prospectively,  if  not  immediately,  include 
both  the  historic  churches,  and  the  reformed  churches,  the 
oldest  denominations  and  the  latest  sects,  as  alike  within  the 
scope  of  a  true  church  unity. 

The  Need  of  a  Practical  Consensus. 

The  other  practical  principle  is,  that  the  true  Church  unity 
must  be  based  upon  the  actual  consensus  of  all  existing 
churches  in  doctrine,  ritual,  and  polity.  With  their  ideal  con- 
sensus we  can  have  but  little  to  do.  In  what  doctrines  or 
articles  of  faith  they  ought  to  be  consentient ;  what  dogmas 
should  be  rejected,  or  retained,  or  modified  in  order  to  make 
them  rightly  consentient,  is  largely  a  matter  of  pure  specula- 
tion. Many  of  us  could  not  agree  as  to  the  terms  of  such  an 
ideal  agreement.  If  some  of  us  should  frame  such  an  agree- 
ment, satisfactory  to  ourselves,  others  would  not  assent  to  it. 
In  the  end  we  might  only  be  adding  one  more  sect  to  the 
medley,  and  so  make  confusion  worse  confounded.  Church 
unity  cannot  thus  be  built  up  on  the  ruins  of  all  existing 
churches.^ 

Nor  have  we  anymore  to  do  with  a  future  consensus  of  the 
churches,  to   be    reached    in    the    progress  of  learning    and 

1  This  maybe  the  peril  of  the  "Brotherhood  of  Christian  Unity"  and  any 
like  associations  which  ignore  all  existing  churches  for  the  sake  of  some  meagre 
consensus  of  Christianity  with  other  religions  or  some  common  Christian  faith 
which  contains  only  the  minimum  of  Christian  truth  and  is  too  vague  and  ideal 
to  be  made  an  organic  bond  of  true  Church  unity. 


The  Lambeth  Proposals.  8i 

liberty.  In  what  doctrines  they  will  be  consentient  ultimately 
in  coming  generations,  or  what  dogmas  will  have  been  lost  or 
gained  in  the  Church  of  the  millennium,  is  sheer  beyond  our 
ken.  Some  of  us  may  doubt  if  such  a  perfect  agreement 
will  ever  come ;  and  any  of  us  who  hope  for  it  could  not  now 
project  it  without  the  gift  of  prophecy,  as  well  as  the  under- 
standing of  all  mysteries.  Church  unity  cannot  be  built  after 
any  prophetic  model  let  down  from  heaven,  ready  made  and 
complete,  like  the  New  Jerusalem  in  the  Apocalypse.^ 

It  is  only  with  the  actual,  the  existing,  consensus  of  the 
churches  that  we  can  deal.  Not  the  things  which  should  be 
believed  among  us ;  nor  yet  the  things  which  will  be  believed 
among  us ;  but  "  the  things  which  are  most  surely  believed 
among  us,"  as  St.  Luke  expresses  it — this  is  the  practical 
question.  To  this  practical  question  the  catholic  thought  of 
the  age  is  already  addressing  itself;  and  it  has  at  length 
found  voice  and  audience. 

The  Lambeth  Proposals. 

It  has  become  the  rare  honor  and  privilege  of  one  of  the 
smallest  denominations — small  in  numbers  but  large  in  an 
intelligent  survey  of  the  situation — to  lead  all  the  rest  in  this 
great  movement,  and  even  to  be  followed  by  the  mother 
Church  of  England.  The  Bishops  of  the  Protestant  Episco- 
pal Church,  from  their  high  point  of  view,  have  undertaken 
to  "  set  forth  in  order  a  declaration  of  the  things  which  are 
most  surely  believed  among  us."  In  other  words  they  have 
formulated  an  actual  consensus  of  the  churches  as  the  basis 
of  their  unity  ;  an  existing  creed,  ritual,  and  polity  in  which 
they  are  already  more  or  less  consentient,  and  not  some  new 
or  imaginary  creed,  ritual,  and  polity  in  which  they  cannot 

^  In  this  direction  seem  to  tend  those  advocates  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church, 
or  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  or  of  any  other  denominational  church, 
who  hope"  to  realize  church  unity  exclusively  in  their  own  organization  at  some 
remote  millennium  by  destroying  or  supplanting  or  converting  all  the  other 
churches  and  denominations  of  the  country. 
6 


82  The  Four  Articles  of  Church  Uiiity. 

become  consentient  without  utterly  abandoning  their  respec- 
tive standards  or  destroying  their  identity  in  some  ruthless 
process  of  unification. 

This  practical  quality  of  the  Episcopal  declaration  is  one 
of  its  chief  merits.  In  its  very  nature  it  is  a  unifying  mani- 
festo. It  exhibits  to  the  world  the  great  things  in  which 
Christian  bodies  can  agree,  and  exalts  them  above  the  small 
things  in  which  they  differ.  Each  of  the  four  articles,  the 
Scriptures,  the  Creeds,  the  Sacraments,  the  Episcopate,  will 
be  found  to  serve  this  purpose  as  successively  stated.^  The 
Holy  Scriptures  are  already  accepted  as  the  rule  of  faith  by 
all  Christian  denominations  between  the  extremes  of  Roman- 
ism and  Protestantism,  however  varied  may  be  their  interpre- 
tation of  those  Scriptures.  The  Nicene  Creed  is  the  sufficient 
statement  of  the  Christian  faith,  though  it  be  supplemented 
with  denominational  symbols,  such  as  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion, the  Heidelberg  Catechism,  the  Anglican  Articles  of 
Religion,  the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith,  or  the  latest 
American  product  of  creed  making.  The  two  sacraments  of 
Christ  are  administered  with  His  appointed  words  and  ele- 
ments in  all  communions,  the  simplest  as  well  as  the  most 
ritualistic,  not  less  by  the  Baptist  who  insists  upon  immersion 
than  by  the  Romanist  who  withholds  the  cup  from  the  laity. 
The  Historic  Episcopate  is  everywhere  adaptable  to  Congre- 
gationalists,  Presbyterians,  and  Episcopalians  of  every  type, 

^  The  four  articles,  as  proposed  at  Chicago,  and  amended  by  the  Lambeth 
Conference,  are  as  follows  : 

First.  The  Holy  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  as  containing  all 
things  necessary  to  salvation  and  as  being  the  rule  and  ultimate  standard  of 
faith. 

Second.  The  Apostles'  Creed  as  the  Baptismal  symbol ;  and  the  Nicene  Creed 
as  the  sufficient  statement  of  the  Christian  Faith. 

Third.  The  two  Sacraments  ordained  by  Christ  Himself — Baptism  and  the 
Supper  of  the  Lord — ministered  with  unfailing  use  of  Christ's  words  of  institu- 
tion, and  of  the  elements  ordained  by  Him. 

Fourth.  The  Historic  Episcopate,  locally  adapted  in  the  methods  of  its  ad- 
ministration to  the  varying  needs  of  the  nations  and  peoples  called  of  God  into 
the  unity  of  His  Church. 


Cat Jioli city  of  the  Historic  Episcopate.  83 

as  well  to  those  without  as  to  those  within  the  pale  of  that 
Episcopate.  In  a  word,  if  the  Christian  denominations  of 
this  land  were  in  search  of  a  canon,  creed,  ritual,  and  polity, 
which  should  express  their  consensus  as  against  their  dis- 
sensus,  the  essentials  in  which  they  agree  as  distinguished 
from  the  non-essentials  in  which  they  differ,  they  would 
find  them  in  the  four  Principles  of  the  Chicago  Declaration. 

Catholicity  of  the  Four  Articles. 

Another  great  merit  of  that  Declaration  is  its  absolute 
catholicity.  There  is  no  denominationalism  whatever  in  its 
terms.  Although  it  emanates  from  one  of  the  denominations, 
it  proposes  nothing  peculiar  to  that  denomination;  not  the 
Prayer  Book,  not  the  Articles  of  Religion,  not  even  the 
Ordinal  in  its  details.  On  the  contrary  the  things  which  it 
proposes  are  also  possessed  or  shared  by  other  denominations. 
The  Holy  Scriptures  are  the  common  heritage  of  Christen- 
dom, Greek,  and  Latin  as  well  as  Anglican,  American  as  well 
as  European.  The  ecumenical  creeds  are  professed  by  the 
Greek,  Roman,  Lutheran,  Reformed,  and  Presbyterian  com- 
munions, as  well  as  by  the  Protestant  Episcopal  communion. 
The  Sacraments  of  our  Lord  are  scrupulously  observed  by 
many  if  not  all  other  Christian  bodies  than  those  which 
follow  the  use  of  the  English  Liturgy.  The  historic  Episco- 
pate is  a  universal  institution  common  to  Eastern  and  Western 
Christendom,  and  not  confined  to  the  American  House  of 
Bishops.  As  this  last  point  may  not  be  as  obvious  as  the 
other  three  points,  and  yet  is  pivotal  to  the  whole  discussion, 
it  is  important  here  to  give  it  special  attention. 

Catholicity  of  the  Historic  Episcopate. 

The  Historic  Episcopate  would  remain  in  this  country  if 

the    organization     known     as     "  The    Protestant    Episcopal 

Church  "  did  not  exist.     It  would  still  be  represented  to  us 

by  the  Russian  Greek  and  Roman  Catholic  Churches;  encum- 


84  The  Four  Articles  of  Church  Unity. 

bered,  it  is  true,  with  various  dogmas,  but  with  dogmas  no 
better,  or  no  worse,  than  theories  which  encumber  it  in  other 
communions  and  act  as  hindrances  to  unity.  Indeed,  it  is 
quite  conceivable  that  Roman  bishops  in  some  new  reforma- 
tion, more  justly  conservative  than  ours,  may  yet  offer  the 
episcopate  to  their  Protestant  brethren  with  sorhe  stronger 
motives  than  any  that  now  appear  in  the  tender  of  it  from 
another  quarter.  In  that  event  the  whole  ecclesiastical  situa- 
tion would  be  changed.  The  great  Lutheran  communion 
would  be  found  more  closely  allied  to  the  Roman  than  to  the 
Anglican  Episcopate.  The  Reformed  bodies,  Dutch,  French, 
and  German,  might  more  naturally  return  to  the  historic 
primacy  of  Rome  than  to  the  local  primacy  of  Canterbury. 
All  Protestants,  in  fact,  might  then  unite  in  recognizing  a  de 
facto  headship  of  Western  Christendom.  And  thus  the 
Mother  of  Churches  could  grow  as  rapidly  by  conversion  as 
she  has  been  growing  by  emigration.  Stranger  things  have 
happened.  Be  all  this,  however,  as  it  may,  treat  it  as  a  mere 
quixotic  fancy,  the  fact  remains,  that  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  has  no  exclusive  property  in  the  Episcopate,  but  only 
shares  it,  and  shares  it  very  largely,  with  other  and  greater 
historic  churches  in  America  as  well  as  Europe. 

It  should  also  be  remembered  that  at  one  time  in  the  his- 
tory of  that  church  it  was  nearly  on  a  par  with  other 
American  denominations  as  to  the  episcopate  now  deemed  so 
essential  to  its  very  being.  For  more  than  one  hundred 
years,  during  the  whole  colonial  period,  the  so-called  "  Epis- 
copal churches "  scattered  along  the  Atlantic  coast  were 
practically  without  the  Episcopate  and  even  without  episcopal 
visitations.  Successive  generations  of  communicants  grew 
up  unconfirmed,  and  the  clergy  had  little  more  than  the 
distant  oversight  of  the  Bishop  of  London.  It  is  well  known 
that  the  popular  dread  of  an  Episcopal  establishment  was  one 
of  the  causes  of  the  American  Revolution.  After  the  rupture 
with  the  mother  country  it  became  still  more  doubtful 
whether  the  Episcopate  could  be  procured  from  the  Church 


CatJiolicity  of  the  Historic  Episcopate.  85 

of  England.  In  the  emergency  there  was  even  some  thought 
of  applying  for  the  foreign  orders  of  Sweden,  But  the  patri- 
archal Bishop  White  declared  that  in  such  circumstances  "  a 
scrupulous  adherence  to  episcopacy  would  be  sacrificing  the 
substance  to  the  ceremony,"  ^  and  lest  the  essentials  of 
preaching  and  worship  should  utterly  lapse  he  sketched  a 
provisional  polity  with  presbyterial  ordination,  and  other 
features  thoroughly  Presbyterian.  When  at  length  the  Epis- 
copate was  conferred  by  the  English  Bishops  it  simply 
supervened  upon  that  provisional  presbyterian  organization 
as  it  might  now  supervene  upon  any  other  Presbyterian  body; 
and  it  is  still,  in  thought  at  least,  as  separable  from  the  one 
as  it  is  in  fact  separate  from  the  other. 

It  should  further  be  observed,  that  the  college  of  Bishops 
has  logically  (I  do  not  say  formally)  separated  the  episcopate 
from  the  communion  over  which  they  preside,  by  proposing 
it  to  other  communions,  at  the  same  time  nobly  disclaiming 
any  wish  to  absorb  other  communions,  and  declaring  their 
readiness  to  forego  the  modes  of  worship  and  discipline 
peculiar  to  their  own  communion,  and  to  co-operate  with 
other  communions  on  the  basis  of  a  common  faith  and  order, 
in  discountenancing  schism  and  healing  the  wounds  of  the 
body  of  Christ.  In  distinct  terms, "  as  Bishops  in  the  Church 
of  God," "they  have  invited  their  fellow-Christians  to  meet 
them  on  the  outside  common  ground  of  membership  by 
baptism  in  the  Holy  Catholic  Church,  and  there  find  further 
agreement  in  the  four  articles  of  unity.  Suppose,  for  argu- 
ment's sake,  that  the  Presbyterian  Church  should  adopt  these 
articles,  and  at  length  select  presbyters  to  be  consecrated  as 
bishops.     Would  the  Episcopal  college  then  bring  forward 

1  "The  Case  of  the  Episcopal  Churches  in  the  United  States  Considered,"  p. 
19.     By  the  Rev.  Dr.  WilHam  White,  afterward  Bishop  of  Pennsylvania. 

2  The  Declaration  does  not  seem  to  have  proceeded  from  "  the  House  of 
Bishops"  as  a  component  part  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  limited  by  its 
constitution  and  laws,  Lut  from  the  Bishops  in  Council  at  Chicago  and  in  Con- 
ference at  Lambeth. 


86  The  Foui"  Articles  of  Church  Unify. 

the  new  requirement  of  an  oath  of  "  conformity  and  obedience 
to  the  doctrine,  discipline,  and  worship  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States?"  Would  they 
amend  their  own  terms  by  adding  to  the  Holy  Scriptures  the 
church  canons ;  to  the  Nicene  Creed,  the  Articles  of  Religion  ; 
to  the  Sacraments  of  our  Lord,  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer ; 
and  to  the  Historic  Episcopate,  the  entire  ordinal  of  Bishops, 
Priests,  and  Deacons?  Would  they  thus  endeavor,  in  the 
face  of  their  Declaration,  to  absorb  other  communions  or 
impose  upon  them  the  laws,  traditions,  and  usages  of  their 
own  communion?  In  that  case  suppose  the  Moravian,  or 
Swedish,^  or  Old  Catholic  Episcopate  to  have  been  elsewhere 
obtained,  would  they  not  gladly  recognize  and  welcome  it? 

In  order  to  make  this  point  still  clearer  let  us  recur  to  the 
"  case  of  the  Episcopal  churches"  at  the  close  of  the  Revolu- 
tion. Their  situation  as  to  the  question  before  us  was  ana- 
logous to  that  of  presbyterial  churches  at  the  present  time. 
They  had  assumed  a  thoroughly  presbyterial  polity,  though 
as  yet  without  Bishops.  It  is  true,  they  had  also  the  Prayer- 
book  ;  and  the  English  bishops  would  not  confer  the  Episco- 
pal character  until  assured  that  the  Prayer-Book  would  be 
retained  in  its  integrity.  But  that  is  not  now  made  a  condi- 
tion of  the  conferment.  The  Prayer-Book  is  not  even  named 
in  the  terms  proposed  at  Chicago  or  at  Lambeth.  There  is 
nothing  on  the  face  of  those  terms  to  forbid  the  Presbyterian 
church,  as  it  stands  to-day,  from  acquiring  the  episcopate,  if 
so  minded.  Nor  would  it  thereby  go  over  in  a  body  to  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church.  On  the  contrary,  the  revered 
Bishop  of  Western  New  York,  if  correctly  reported,^  has  dis- 
tinctly said :  "  We  have  proposed  a  course  which,  if  carried 


1  Lutheran  clergymen  have  said  that  the  proposed  procurement  of  the  Historic 
Episcopate  from  the  Church  of  Sweden  would  have  the  effect  of  modifying  the 
exclusive  claims  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  among  sister  Protestant 
Churches. 

2  Sermon  of  Bishop  Coxe  at  Buffalo,  in  New  York  Tribune,  March  22,  1891. 


Adaptability  of  the  Historic  Episcopate.         2>'j 

out  by  any  of  the  greater  denominations  of  Christians,  would 
compel  us  to  join  them." 

Adaptability  of  the  Historic  Episcopate. 

I  may  now  add,  that  some  learned  canonists,  if  I  under- 
stand them,  are  already  advocating  an  extension  of  the 
American  Episcopate  to  other  denominations,  as  proposed  by 
the  late  Dr.  Muhlenberg  of  blessed  memory,  and  as  illustrated 
recently  by  the  extension  of  the  Roman  episcopate  over 
Uniate  Greek  congregations  in  this  country,  notwithstanding 
their  married  priests,  trine  immersion,  presbyterial  confirma- 
tion, and  other  tenets  not  held  by  Romanists,  but  held  by 
Episcopalians,  Baptists,  and  Presbyterians.  The  Lambeth 
Conference  itself,  if  I  read  aright,  has  generously  opened  the 
way  for  a  similar  extension  of  the  Anglican  episcopate  to 
other  Christian  communions  abroad  and  at  home,  "  without 
insisting  upon  the  formularies  which  are  the  special  heritage 
of  the  Church  of  England,"  and  even  with  "large  freedom  of 
variation  on  secondary  points  of  doctrine,  worship,  and  dis- 
cipline."^ Both  the  Chicago  and  the  Lambeth  declarations 
also  seem  to  distinguish  the  historic  episcopate  from  its  Greek, 
Roman,  and  Anglican  varieties,  by  providing  that  it  is  to  be 
"  locally  adapted  in  the  methods  of  its  administration  to  the 
varying  needs  of  the  nations  and  peoples  called  of  God  into 
the  unity  of  His  Church."  This  local  adaptation  has  been 
becfun  in  one  of  our  denominations ;  but  it  will  not  be  com- 
plete  until  it  extends  to  all  of  them,  or  at  least  includes  the 
Christian  institutions,  doctrines,  and  usages  of  the  whole 
American  people,  and  so  becomes  still  more  American  and 
less  Anglican,  as  well  as  less  Roman.  Then,  and  not  till  then, 
will  there  be  a  truly  American  variety  of  the  historic  episco- 
pate. 

The  object  of  making  these  distinctions,  I  need  scarcely 
say,  is  not  to  raise  debatable  questions,  some  of  which  are  too 

1  Lambeth  Conferences  of  iSSS,  p.  337. 


88  The  Four  Articles  of  Church  Ujiity. 

difficult  and  delicate  for  me  to  handle,  or  perhaps  even  to 
suggest.  I  am  simply  aiming  to  emphasize  the  fact  that  the 
historic  episcopate,  like  the  other  three  articles,  is  only  part 
of  a  common  heritage,  and  more  or  less  adaptable  to  all 
denominations  with  their  respective  standards  and  usages. 
In  theory  at  least,  it  is  as  adaptable  to  the  Presbyterian 
Church  with  its  Confession  of  Faith,  and  Directory  of  Worship, 
as  to  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  with  its  Articles  and 
Prayer-Book.  In  point  of  fact,  however,  such  adaptation  is 
not  imminent  and  may  not  soon  befall.  Presbyterians  as  yet 
value  the  liturgy  more  than  the  episcopate,  and  could  more 
easily  accept  the  Articles  and  the  Prayer-Book  than  the 
Ordinal.  But  should  the  day  ever  happily  come  when  the 
high  contracting  parties  would  be  ready  for  corporate  reunion, 
we  may  assume  that  they  would  have  wisdom  and  grace 
enough  to  adjust  all  canonical  questions  of  ordination  and 
jurisdiction  in  a  spirit  of  Christian  love  and  harmony. 

Unifying  Power  of  the  Historic  Episcopate. 
The  next  point  to  be  considered  is  the  fitness  of  the  four 
articles  to  serve  as  a  basis  of  church  unity.  The  fitness  of 
the  first  three  articles  for  such  a  purpose  is  scarcely  in  ques- 
tion. The  chief  reformed  churches,  at  least,  can  estimate  the 
scriptures,  the  creeds,  and  the  sacraments  as  capital  points  of 
agreement  and  means  of  unification.  But  the  unifying  power 
of  the  historic  episcopate  is  not  yet  so  highly  appreciated.  Be 
it  observed,  the  intrinsic  value  of  that  Christian  institution  is 
not  now  before  us.  As  to  what  special  grace  or  authority  or 
advantage  it  conveys,  opinions  differ  among  those  who  view  it 
from  the  inside,  as  well  as  among  those  who  view  it  from  the 
outside;  and  good  churchmen  may  be  found  on  both  sides  of 
the  pale.  Waiving  the  discussion  of  such  opinions,  not  as 
unimportant  by  any  means,  but  as  not  relevant  to  the  present 
question,  we  are  here  only  to  estimate  its  external  value  as  a 
unifying  bond  among  the  denominations.  Never  before  has  it 
been  so  presented.     The  simple  fact  that  it  has  been  so  pre- 


Uiiifymg  Power  of  the  Historic  Episcopate.     89 

sented,  marks  an  epoch,  it  may  be  a  silent  revolution,  in  the 
history  of  the  church.  Too  often  hitherto  has  it  appeared  in  a 
polemic  light  as  a  bone  of  contention,  an  occasion  of  dissent 
and  schism,  and  even  a  barrier  to  Christian  intercourse  between 
families,  nations,  and  races.  Now  at  length,  as  never  before 
in  three  centuries,  we  are  invited  to  behold  it  in  an  irenic 
light  as  an  organic  link  of  connection,  a  basis  of  reunion,  and 
a  magnetic  centre  of  harmony.  I  can  give  but  the  heads  of 
so  pleasing  an  argument. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  the  de  facto  government  of  three- 
fourths,  if  not  of  four-fifths,  of  Christendom.  Reason  about  its 
dejiire  claims  as  we  may,  an  immense  majority  of  our  fellow- 
Christians  throughout  the  world,  and  nearly  one-sixth  of  our 
fellow-citizens  in  this  country,  are  tenaciously  attached  to  it,  and 
not  at  all  likely  to  be  detached  from  it ;  and  these  plain  facts  of 
the  ecclesiastical  situation  must  be  dealt  with  in  any  scheme  of 
comprehension  which  aims  to  be  at  once  practical  and  complete. 
Otherwise,  everything  like  church  unity  is  simply  out  of  the 
question.  There  can  be  no  reunion  of  Christendom  without 
the  historic  episcopate,     - 

In  the  second  place,  it  bases  church  unity  upon  church 
polity,  not  upon  systematic  theology.  Until  polity  has  been 
shaken  loose  from  such  theology  we  can  never  have  organic 
unity.  Exact  theological  agreement  as  a  basis  of  church 
unity  is  already  a  failure.  Denominations  founded  upon  such 
agreement  have  been  going  to  pieces  all  around  us.  Such 
agreement  never  has  existed ;  not  even  in  the  Apostolic 
church,  which  allowed  doctrinal  differences  without  the  un- 
christian results  of  schism  and  sectarianism.  Such  agree- 
ment never  can  exist,  so  long  as  human  nature  is  diverse  in 
its  temperaments  and  many  related  truths  are  paradoxical  in 
our  logic.  Such  agreement  never  ought  to  exist,  for  the  sake 
of  Christian  doctrine  itself.  Better  far  that  two  schools  of 
theology  should  fairly  contend  in  the  same  church  than  rush 
apart  into  two  hostile  sects.  Never  fear  for  our  common 
orthodoxy,  while  special  orthodoxies  take  care  of  themselves 


go  The  Foiw  Ai^ticles  of  Church  Unity. 

in  the  march  of  knowledge  and  under  the  laws  of  thought. 
Such  agreement  has  not  even  been  attempted  by  the  strongest 
churches.  No  Calvinism  has  been  so  high  and  no  Arminian- 
ism  so  low  as  the  Calvinism  and  Arminianism  nourished  side 
by  side  within  the  ample  church  of  England.  The  brief  ex- 
periment to  hold  together  that  church  on  the  theological  basis 
of  the  Westminster  Confession  issued  in  disastrous  failure. 
All  history  shows  that  church  unity  must  rest  upon  an  insti- 
tution, not  upon  doctrines ;  and  upon  an  institution  ample 
enough  and  elastic  enough  to  include  all  doctrines,  even 
variant  doctrines  concerning  itself.  Such  an  institution  is  that 
episcopate,  which  not  only  embraces  the  national  varieties  of 
Catholicism,  but  shows  a  capacity  for  embracing  the  doctrinal 
diversities  of  Protestantism  in  the  bonds  of  a  reunited  Chris- 
tendom. 

In  the  third  place,  it  is  comprehensive  of  all  forms  of  polity 
as  well  as  schools  of  doctrine.  In  its  structure  it  involves  in 
due  organic  relation  the  congregational,  the  presbyterial,  and 
the  episcopal  elements  of  church  government.  The  two 
former  may  exist  apart  from  the  latter;  but  not  the  latter  apart 
from  the  two  former.  Episcopacy  includes  the  other  elements 
as  the  greater  includes  the  less,  and  is  upheld  by  them  as  the 
higher  is  upheld  by  the  lower.  Hence  Congregationalism  as 
a  basis  of  church  unity  would  on  principle  be  inorganic,  if 
not  disorganizing.  Presbyterianism,  though  organic  and 
organizing,  is  separate  and  largely  unhistoric,  and  so  far  as 
historic,  has  become  too  dogmatic  and  polemic.  Episcopali- 
anism  also,  when  independent  and  unhistoric,  becomes  sec- 
tarian and  schismatical,  losing  its  unifying  force.  But  historic 
episcopacy  has  ever  included,  while  it  surmounted,  both  the 
congregational  and  the  presbyterial  spheres  of  the  church 
organism,  and  as  locally  adapted  to  the  civil  and  religious 
institutions  of  this  country,  will  neither  sacrifice  the  liberties 
of  the  congregation,  nor  the  rights  of  presbytery.  Orthodoxy 
and  liberty  can  dwell  together  in  presbytery  only  under  the 
mild  sway  of  the  historic  episcopate. 


Unifying  Power  of  the  Histoi'ic  Episcopate.      91 

In  the  fourth  place,  it  is  tolerant  of  all  types  of  churchman- 
ship  as  well  as  forms  of  polity  and  schools  of  doctrine.  It 
neither  enjoins,  nor  forbids,  a  doctrine  of  apostolical  succes- 
sion. Presented  as  a  historic  institution  apart  from  any  theory 
of  its  origin  and  claims,  it  allows  all  such  theories  without 
repressing  any  of  them.  Not  the  prelatic  theory,  not  the 
presbyterian  theory,  not  the  rationalistic  theory,  not  the 
ritualistic  theory,  alone  can  claim  exclusive  property  in  it 
without  rendering  it  partisan  and  sectarian.  Were  any  one 
of  these  theories  made  a  basis  of  church  unity,  the  church 
itself  would  be  torn  asunder,  and  its  different  schools  of 
churchmanship  fly  apart  as  mere  wrangling  sects.  The  fact, 
however,  that  they  are  found  loyally  uniting  in  adherence 
to  an  institution  which  they  estimate  from  so  many  diverse 
points  of  view — this  fact  proves  its  capacity  to  combine 
the  Congregationalists  and  Presbyterians,  still  beyond  its 
reach,  with  those  like-minded  churchmen  already  within 
its  bounds.  And  unless  different  rules  are  applied  to  can- 
didates and  incumbents,  it  may  be  accepted  in  the  interest 
of  church  unity,  as  it  is  maintained,  on  a  presbyterian  no  less 
than  a  prelatic  theory  of  its  origin  and  merits.  It  will  never 
be  endangered  by  churchmen  who  have  had  presbyterian 
training  ;  nor  can  it  fully  accomplish  its  mission  in  this  coun- 
try without  the  sort  of  ecclesiastical  backbone  which  they 
furnish.  The  historic  episcopate  cannot  do  without  the  his- 
toric presbyterate. 

In  the  fifth  place,  its  exclusion  of  non-episcopal  ministries, 
though  otherwise  deemed  opprobrious,  gives  it  in  fact  a  unify- 
ing quality.  By  recognizing  such  ministries  it  could  not 
help  true  church  unity,  but  would  really  hinder  and  frustrate 
it.  It  would  only  make  new  schisms  in  trying  to  heal  old 
ones.  It  would  at  once  loosen  and  scatter  the  various  schools 
of  divinity,  polity,  and  churchmanship  which  it  now  holds 
together  in  bonds  as  tenacious  as  they  are  elastic.  I  state  the 
fact  without  explaining  it :  Differences  which  have  elsewhere 
issued  in  sectarianism,  are  somehow  restrained  like  balanced 


92  The  Four  Articles  of  CJmrch  Unity. 

forces,  or  blended  like  discordant  notes  in  a  higher  harmony. 
Episcopalians,  Presbyterians,  and  Congregationalists  in  their 
relations  as  denominationalists  are  in  a  chronic  state  of  antag- 
onism and  irritation ;  but  the  very  same  Christians,  or  others 
like  them,  in  their  relations  as  churchmen,  holding  to  the 
unity  of  the  visible  church,  simply  lose  all  their  sectarian 
rancor,  without  losing  their  distinctive  beliefs.  Denomina- 
tional variety  is  thus  visibly  made  consistent  with  church 
unity.  It  is  not  a  matter  of  speculation.  We  have  before  us 
all  the  while  the  object-lesson  of  a  unifying  episcopate. 

In  the  sixth  place,  it  is  the  source  and  guarantee  of  the 
other  three  terms  of  church  unity.  Historically,  the  Sacra- 
ments, the  Creeds,  and  the  Sacred  Canon  emanated  from  the 
primitive  episcopacy,  howsoever  that  episcopate  may  have  been 
connected  with  the  apostles.  Historically,  they  afterward 
continued  in  connection  with  episcopacy,  though  encrusted 
with  error  and  superstition  during  the  middle  ages  until  the 
Reformation.  Historically,  ever  since  they  have  been  more 
persistently  maintained  in  Episcopal  churches  than  in  other 
Reformed  churches.  They  may  sometimes  be  found  apart 
from  episcopacy,  but  not  episcopacy  apart  from  them.  To 
render  them  consistent  and  complete  episcopacy  is  needed, 
and  as  connected  with  them  it  imparts  strength  and  concord 
to  them  all.  At  once  sustaining  them  and  sustained  by  them, 
it  is  the  very  keystone  of  church  unity. 

In  the  last  place,  it  is  only  through  the  historic  episcopate 
that  the  primitive  church  unity  can  be  restored.  All  parties 
seem  agreed  that  the  congregational,  presbyterial,  and  epis- 
copal elements  of  polity  coexisted  normally  in  the  undivided 
church  of  the  apostles.  All  must  admit  that  they  are  now 
in  an  abnormal,  dismembered  state,  where  they  are  not 
more  or  less  obliterated  by  an  exclusive  Congregationalism, 
or  Presbyterianism,  or  Episcopalianism.  In  order  to  recover 
the  lost  organic  unity  of  these  elements,  we  must  retrace  the 
steps  by  which  it  was  first  found.  According  to  the  learned 
Bishop  Lightfoot  the   primitive   bishops   gradually   became 


Unification  by   Confederatio7i.  93 

centers  of  unity,  and  guardians  of  faith  among  the  scattered 
congregations  and  presbyteries  of  the  early  church.  In  like 
manner  the  Congregationalist,  Presbyterian,  and  Episcopalian 
denominations  of  our  day  can  only  recover  true  organic  unity 
by  returning  by  the  same  steps  to  that  episcopate  as  it  first 
arose  in  the  apostles'  time.  Already  one  of  those  denomina- 
tions has  illustrated  in  its  history  this  primitive  evolution  ; 
having  existed  first  in  the  embryonic  stage  of  Congregation- 
alism, as  a  cluster  of  detached  parishes ;  thence,  emerging 
into  Presbyterianism,  with  its  conventions  of  clerical  and  lay 
delegates;  and  at  length  acquiring  the  full  ecclesiastical  char- 
acter in  the  Anglican  episcopate.  And  other  denominations, 
as  yet  congregational  or  presbyterial,  are  advancing,  with 
various  rates  of  progress  and  degrees  of  approximation, 
toward  the  same  distant  but  inevitable  goal  of  the  whole 
organic  development  of  American  Christianity.  If  we  are 
ever  to  have  the  one  United  Church  of  the  United  States,  it 
would  seem  destined  to  find  its  flower  and  crown  in  the  his- 
toric episcopate. 

At  this  point  comes  into  view  the  next  important  question : 
the  mode  of  approaching  church  unity  on  the  basis  of  the 
four  articles  of  the  Chicago-Lambeth  declaration.  Two 
methods,  or  schemes, have  been  proposed:  confederation  and 
consolidation.  Without  opposing  either  of  them,  I  shall 
advocate  organic  reunion  and  growth  as  the  more  natural  and 
hopeful  process.     Let  us  briefly  compare  them. 

Unification  by  Confederation. 

According  to  the  first  of  the  three  methods,  as  advocated 
by  a  Presbyterian  divine,^  the  different  denominations  would 
meet  by  deputies  in  a  general  convention,  and  formally  adopt 
the   Lambeth  proposals    as    articles  of  confederation,   while 


^  Rev.  Prof.  Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D.,  of  Union  Theological  Seminary,  New 
York. 


94  The  Four  Articles  of  Church  U7iity. 

retaining  in  all  other  respects  their  respective  standards  of 
doctrine,  polity,  and  worship,  except  so  far  as  they  might 
require  modification  and  adaptation.  Such  federal  councils 
of  a  single  denomination  have  already  been  held  by  the 
Anglican  body  in  the  Pan-Anglican  conference;  by  the 
Reformed  body  in  the  Pan-Presbyterian  Conference ;  and  by 
the  Congregationalists  and  Methodists  in  their  World's  Con- 
ventions. Similar  conferences  may  yet  be  held  by  the 
Lutheran  churches,  and  perhaps  by  some  of  the  Baptist 
denominations.  "  If  these  denominational  conferences,"  says 
the  learned  Professor,  "  should  accept  the  four  propositions 
of  the  Lambeth  Conference;  or  if  accepting  them,  they 
should  make  some  additional  proposals ;  if  the  Presbyterian 
General  Conference  should  propose  to  accept  the  historic 
episcopate,  provided  that  a  presbyterial  organization  of  the 
church  should  also  be  adopted  and  the  two  systems  be 
brought  into  harmony;  and  if  the  Congregational  General 
Conference  should  propose  to  accept  the  historic  episcopate, 
provided  that  the  right  of  the  Christian  people,  and  the  inde- 
pendence of  the  local  church  were  guarded  within  certain 
definite  areas  ;  if  we  could  have  a  general  council  of  the 
Christian  churches  of  America,  on  the  basis  of  the  four  propo- 
sitions of  the  House  of  Bishops,  with  any  reasonable  addi- 
tions or  modifications  that  might  be  proposed  ;  church  unity 
would,  in  my  opinion,  essentially  be  won."  ^ 

The  advantages  of  this  attractive  scheme  are  apparent  at 
the  first  glance.  It  proceeds  upon  the  representative  and 
federal  principles  with  which  we  have  become  familiar  in  the 
history  of  our  political  unification  ;  and  it  harmonizes  with  the 
genius  of  our  religious  institutions,  especially  in  congregation- 
alist  and  presbyterian  communions.  It  would  reduce  the 
number  of  sects  by  compacting  them  closely  in  family  groups 
or  clusters,  according  to  their  hereditary  and  doctrinal  affini- 
ties.    It  would  satisfy  the  denominational  spirit  by  according 


1  The  Churchman,  June  21,  1S90. 


Uiiificatioji  by   Consolidation.  95 

to  it  an  equal  voice  and  vote  in  council,  whatever  may  be  the 
numbers  or  wealth  or  intelligence  represented.  It  would 
offer  at  length  the  moving  spectacle  of  great  denominational 
leaders,  meeting  together  not  for  conflict,  nor  for  recrimina- 
tion, as  in  former  times,  but  to  adjust  the  ancient  disputes  of 
Christendom  in  a  spirit  of  love  and  harmony.  And  it  is  not 
unlikely  that  it  may  hereafter  play  some  important  part  in  the 
unifying  process. 

The  difficulties  of  the  scheme  soon  appear  on  closer  view. 
It  would  substitute  the  artificial  processes  of  federation  and 
legislation  for  those  of  spontaneous  growth  and  culture  in  the 
formation  of  public  opinion  and  in  social  action.  It  presup- 
poses radical  changes  in  some  denominations,  and  in  others 
an  immense  increase  of  the  ecclesiastical  spirit.  The  Roman 
Catholics,  of  course,  would  not  send  deputies  to  such  a  coun- 
cil. The  Baptists  and  Congregationalists  could  not,  without 
abandoning  their  own  principles ;  nor  might  their  loose 
aggregation  of  churches  be  held  by  the  decisions  of  such  a 
council.  The  Methodists,  with  their  sense  of  a  denomina- 
tional mission  and  lack  of  churchly  feeling,  are  not  yet  ready 
for  such  a  council.  It  would  be  practically  restricted  to  the 
Reformed  and  Presbyterian  churches,  and  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church,  supposing  the  latter  to  appear  in  the  con- 
ference. And  then,  should  the  first  three  Lambeth  articles  be 
adopted,  the  fourth  would  soon  bristle  with  the  delicate  ques- 
tions of  episcopal  ordination  and  jurisdiction,  for  which  the 
whole  Presbyterian  body  at  least  is  not  yet  prepared.  The 
result  would  not  be  ecclesiastical  unity,  but  a  mere  league, 
macfe  offensive  and  defensive  by  the  reassertion  of  Presbytery 
against  Prelacy  on  the  one  side,  and   against  Papacy  on  the 

other. 

Unification  by  Consolidation. 

According  to  the  second  method  of  unification,  proposed 
by  an   Episcopal  clergyman,^  a  single  denomination  would 

^  The  Rev.  W.  R.  Huntington,  D.D.,  Rector  of  Grace  Church,  New  York. 


96  The  Four  Articles  of  Church  Unity. 

become  the  nucleus  around  which  others  would  be  crystal- 
lized, and  at  length  consolidated  in  one  ecclesiastical  system, 
while  yet  retaining  their  admirable  variety  in  doctrine,  ritual, 
culture,  and  life.  As  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  alone 
possesses  the  four  Lambeth  conditions  of  agreement,  it  is 
natural  to  take  it  as  such  a  rallying  center,  and  hope  to 
merge  other  Christian  bodies  into  corporate  union  with  it. 
The  old-fashioned  view  seems  to  have  been,  that  it  is  poten- 
tially the  national  church,  destined,  as  it  stands  to-day,  with 
its  canons,  liturgy,  articles,  and  orders,  to  dissolve  and  recom- 
pose  the  other  one  hundred  and  forty-two  denominations 
around  it,  and  transform  them  into  Protestant  Episcopalian 
churchmen  by  the  sheer  force  of  propagandism.  Such  a  view 
would  demand  the  faith  and  zeal  of  a  Hildebrand.  The  later 
and  larger  view  seems  to  be  that,  by  incorporating  the  four 
principles  in  the  existing  constitution  of  the  church  as  the 
only  ecclesiastical  requirements,  other  denominations  accept- 
ing those  requirements  might  be  included  within  its  pale, 
substantially  as  they  now  are,  with  an  allowed  diversity  in 
their  methods  of  worship  and  work.  "  Every  one  of  the  de- 
nominations," says  the  eloquent  advocate  of  this  view,  "  has 
its  own  hallowed  memories,  its  own  roll  of  martyrs,  its  own 
cherished  manner  of  worship,  its  own  long-tried  methods  of 
missionary  work.  The  theory  of  consolidation  supposes  not 
only  their  permitted  but  their  constitutionally  guarded  con- 
tinuance." ^ 

No  true  lover  of  church  unity  could  let  mere  traditional 
prejudice  or  sectarian  jealousy  mar  this  noble  ideal  of  charity 
and  harmony.  If  any  one  of  the  denominations  is  thus  des- 
tined to  become  like  Aaron's  rod  that  swallowed  up  the  rods 
of  the  magicians,  this  were  better  than  that  the  serpent  brood 
of  sects  and  schisms  should  go  on  multiplying.  Nor  could 
any  one  of  them  better  achieve  such  a  consolidation  than  that 
one  which  stands  among  them,  not  only  as  the  very  flower  of 

1  "  The  Peace  of  the  Church,' '  p.  42. 


Unification  by   Co7isolidation.  97 

English  civilization,  but  as  the  highest  type  of  organized 
Christianity  ;  which  combines  in  its  polity  congregational, 
presbyterial,  and  episcopal  elements  that  have  elsewhere  be- 
come separate  and  disjointed  ;  which  conserves  in  its  liturgy 
the  choicest  formularies  of  the  reformed  as  well  as  the  historic 
churches;  and  of  which,  as  an  intermediary  between  Protes- 
tantism and  Catholicism  and  in  touch  with  both,  it  has  been 
strikingly  said,^  it  was  like  one  of  those  precious  chemicals 
capable  of  fusing  substances  otherwise  unassociable.  No 
wonder  that  even  the  Jesuit  De  Maistre  was  forced  to  admit 
its  wonderful  future,  like  Balaam  blessing  the  distant  tents  of 
Israel  wdiich  he  had  been  fain  to  curse.  No  wonder  that  non- 
episcopal  divines,  as  well  as  far-seeing  bishops,  are  beginning 
to  recognize  "  the  majestic  mission  of  the  Anglican  Church 
and  of  her  daughter  in  America."  Whatever  other  great  and 
powerful  denominations  may  yet  wheel  into  the  line  of  his- 
toric Christianity,  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  must  ever 
lead  them  in  the  march  toward  ultimate  unity. 

The  difficulties  of  consolidation  are  more  in  the  process 
than  in  the  result,  more  in  the  way  of  approach  than  m  the 
end  attained.  Though  its  aim  be  catholic,  its  point  of  de- 
parture would  be  denominational.  Though  in  theory  tolerant 
of  other  communions,  it  would  in  practice  absorb  them. 
However  self-sacrificing  in  its  spirit,  it  would  look  to  them 
like  zealous  proselytism  and  ecclesiastical  aggrandizement. 
While  projecting  before  them  an  attractive  goal  of  unity  amid 
variety,  it  would  seem  to  invite  them  thither  only  through  the 
successive  stages  of  concession,  submission,  absorption,  ex- 
tinction. In  their  view  it  would  be  somewhat  like  gaininsi 
the  boon  of  immortality  at  the  loss  of  personal  identity. 
Here  and  there  some  detached  Congregationalist  society,  ripe 
for  the  change,  might  melt  away  into  the  greater  absorbing 
body.     But  compact  national  churches  would  not  so  easily 

^  De  Maistre,  as  quoted  by  Bishop  Coxe  in  a  paper  read  at  the  Chicago  Con- 
gress on  Organic  Unity. 
7 


98  The  Four  Articles  of  CJmrch  Unity. 

surrender  their  corporate  life.  The  Methodists  would  need 
to  undo  much  of  their  history  before  they  could  return  to  the 
church  whence  they  went  out.  The  Lutheran  and  Reformed 
bodies,  Dutch  and  German,  never  having  gone  out  of  the  Angli- 
can Church,  could  not  very  well  be  asked  to  return.  The  great 
Presbyterian  communion,  ever  since  it  was  driven  out,  has 
set  up  rival  claims  which  it  would  not  lower  without  at  least 
a  salute.  And  the  greater  Roman  Catholic  communion  would 
simply  reverse  the  invitation  and  bid  us  all  come  back  to  the 
mother  church.  Moreover,  should  the  invitation  be  heeded, 
the  little  consolidating  body,  with  all  its  conservative  vigor, 
would  soon  be  resisting  the  intrusion  of  so  much  foreign  and 
uncongenial  material,  or  find  it  not  very  easy  of  assimilation. 
At  least  one  school  of  churchmen  would  view  it  suspiciously 
as  a  Trojan  horse  of  masked  sectarianism.  Should  the  con- 
solidating process  become  rapid  and  complete,  the  smaller 
absorbing  body  would  soon  be  itself  absorbed  by  the  larger 
entering  bodies ;  the  transforming  nucleus  would  be  itself 
transformed  by  alien  ideas  and  usages  ;  at  the  rallying  center 
would  spring  up  repellent  as  well  as  attracting  influences,  and 
in  the  end  Episcopacy  would  be  obliged  to  reassert  itself 
against  denominationalism  as  well  as  against  Romanism, 

Unification  by  Organic  Growth. 
Between  these  extreme  methods  there  is  a  third  mode  of 
unification,  which  I  have  ventured  to  call  the  process  of 
organic  reunion  and  growth.  It  would  seek  to  combine  the 
good  in  the  other  two  methods  without  the  evil.  In  distinc- 
tion from  the  first,  it  would  be  an  organic  process  of  growth 
rather  than  an  artificial  act  of  legislation ;  and  in  distinction 
from  the  second,  it  would  be  an  organic  reunion  of  ecclesiast- 
ical elements  in  different  Christian  bodies,  rather  than  a  crude 
absorption  by  one  Christian  body  of  all  the  rest ;  a  knitting 
together  of  the  congregational,  presbyterial,  and  episcopal 
polities  wherever  found,  rather  than  a  welding  of  the  existing  ' 
medley  of  churches.     Its   rallying  center  would  be  in  the 


UniJicatio7i  by  07^ganic  Growth.  99 

midst  of  the  denominations,  not  aside  in  any  one  of  them. 
Its  crystallizing  nucleus  would  simply  be  the  four  Lambeth 
articles  of  unity  as  detached  from  the  Episcopal  Church,  no 
less  than  from  the  Roman  Church,  or  from  the  Reformed 
churches,  or  from  any  other  churches  which  may  possess  or 
acquire  some  or  all  of  them.  Especially  would  it  find  such 
a  nucleus  or  germ  in  that  catholic  episcopate,  which,  if  con- 
fined to  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  would  itself  become 
denominational  and  sectarian  ;  but  if  extended  over  the  other 
denominations,  would  recombine  their  congregational,  pres- 
byterial,  and  episcopal  institutions  not  merely  in  one  ideal 
polity,  but  as  restored  parts  of  the  one  undivided  Apostolic 
Church.  In  a  word,  while  confederation  would  arrange  the 
denominations  in  a  mere  artificial  mosaic,  and  consolidation 
would  compact  them  as  a  crude  conglomerate,  organic  re- 
union would  develop  them  as  an  organism  into  the  one  body 
of  Christ. 

Organic  Reunion  of  Presbytery  and  Episcopacy. 

Take,  for  illustration,  the  Presbyterian  and  Episcopal 
Churches,^  now  engaged  in  hopeful  negotiation  on  the  basis 
of  the  Lambeth  proposals.  Were  these  two  bodies  at  once 
either    confederated  or  consolidated,  it  would  be  an  incon- 

^  The  Presbyterian  Church  is  more  closely  allied  to  the  Protesant  Episcopal 
Church,  both  historically  and  doctrinally,  than  any  other  Christian  body  in  the 
country.  Its  standards,  as  framed  by  the  Westminster  Assembly,  were  once 
legally  established  in  the  Church  of  England,  as  they  are  now  maintained  by  the 
established  Church  of  Scotland,  with  the  Sovereign  as  a  communicant  in  both 
churches.  The  two  communions  hold  substantially  the  same  doctrine  of  the 
ministry  and  sacraments,  the  one  attaching  the  doctrine  to  presbytery  and  the 
other  attaching  it  to  episcopacy;  and  in  other  matters  of  polity  and  worship  there 
has  long  been  a  growing  assimilation  and  agreement. 

The  General  Assembly  of  1890  met  the  advances  of  the  General  Convention 
by  passing  without  dissent  the  following  resolution. 

"  The  Assembly  approves  in  general  the  spirit  and  position  of  the  Committee 
on  Church  Unity  in  its  correspondence  with  the  representatives  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church,  and  desires  a  continuance  of  these  negotiations  with  reference 
to  a  union  on  the  basis  of  the  four  propositions  of  the  House  of  Bishops,  in  order 


lOO  The  Four  Articles  of  Church  Unity. 

ceivable  catastrophe  to  both  of  them.  It  is  not  so  inconceiv- 
able, however,  that  they  should  be  brought  together  at  points 
where  they  are  in  touch  and  admit  of  connection.  Already 
they  have  such  points  of  contact  and  agreement  in  three  of 
the  Lambeth  articles  ;  in  the  Scriptures,  the  Creeds,  and  the 
Sacraments.  It  only  remains  to  attach  them  in  the  Episco- 
pate. And  that  attachment  might  be  begun  by  means  of 
concurrent  ordinations,  on  the  principle  advocated  by  a 
learned  and  accomplished  bishop  of  St.  Andrews  (the  late 
Dr.  Charles  Wordsworth ')  for  the  reconciliation  of  Presby- 


that  all  questions  at  issue  may  be  discussed  in  a  temper  of  Christian  charity  and 
brotherly  affection,  with  a  view  to  their  full  and  final  solution." 

The  last  General  Assembly  at  Washington  continued  its  Special  Committee  on 
Church  Unity,  Rev.  Dr.  Joseph  T.  Smith  and  Rev.  Prof.  Francis  Brown,  and 
approved  their  report  of  progress,  which  contained  this  recommendation  : 

"  The  Assembly  hereby  recommends  the  holding  of  conventions,  according  to 
the  terms  proposed  by  the  Episcopal  Commission  for  the  promotion  of  Christian 
unity.  It  also  enjoins  upon  the  members  of  the  church  represented  in  the  Assem- 
bly, prayer,  both  in  public  and  in  private,  for  the  realization  of  this  unity." 

^  "  The  proposition  of  Bishop  Wordsworth,  made  through  a  committee  of  the 
last  Lambeth  Conference,  was  substantially  this:  that  the  full  ministerial  stand- 
ing of  clergymen  Presbyterially  ordained  be  now  recognized,  provided  that  here- 
after all  their  ordinations  should  be  by  bishops.  .  .  .  This  proposition  was 
not  accepted  by  the  Conference,  and  probably  for  two  good  reasons,  if  for  no 
other  :  because  it  was  not  prepared  to  act  so  suddenly  in  so  serious  a  matter,  and 
also  because,  being  only  a  Conference,  it  had  no  authority  so  to  act.  But  .it 
should  also  be  said,  that  ten  out  of  the  twelve  members  of  the  committee  voted 
for  it,  and  that  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  expressed  his  '  very  full  and  hearty 
sympathy  with  it.'  Altogether  it  is  no  doubt  a  very  special  expedient ;  but  it  is 
the  only  one  so  far  proposed  with  any  promise  of  likelihood  in  it.  God  grant 
that  some  way  out  of  the  dilemma  may  be  found  with  honor  to  Him  and  to  all !  " 
Address  on  Church  Unity  by  the  Right  Rev.  Boyd  Vincent,  S.  T.  D. ,  Assistant 
Bishop  of  Sotdhern  Ohio. 

The  suggestion  above  made  differs  from  this  proposition  in  two  respects  :  In 
the  Episcopalian  view,  the  authorization  would  not  be  universal  and  indiscrimin- 
ate, but  gradual,  as  special  cases  arise  ;  and  in  the  Presbyterian  view,  the  ques- 
tion of  valid  ordination  would  not  be  raised  but  left  untouched  in  the  sphere  of 
private  judgment,  as  at  present.  Many  Episcopalians  and  Presbyterians  already 
hold  the  principles  involved  in  a  concurrent  ordination.  Why  not  act  upon  those 
principles  formally  as  well  as  practically,  and  in  a  frank  and  generous  spirit? 


Reunion  of  Presbytery  and  Episcopacy.        loi 

terians  and  Episcopalians  in  the  Church  of  Scotland.  In 
such  ordinations  candidates  would  be  presented  to  the  bishop, 
with  the  concurrence  of  the  presbytery,  by  priests  who  have 
had  formerly  Presbyterian  ordination,  or  perhaps  by  Presby- 
terian ministers  who  have  had  formerly  Episcopal  ordination. 
The  transaction  might  be  kept  within  the  rubric  as  well  as  the 
book,  or  at  least  within  the  Lambeth  proposals,  and  would 
involve  a  practical  sanction  of  all  conceivable  interests  and 
claims,  with  no  possibility  of  doubt  or  controversy.  Both 
parties  would  have  acted  upon  their  respective  theories  of  the 
Christian  ministry,  without  conceding  anything  to  each  other, 
and  without  reflecting  upon  one  another.  The  most  extreme 
Episcopalian,  from  his  point  of  view,  would  have  fully  legiti- 
mated a  ministry  which  on  other  grounds  he  was  prepared  to 
appreciate  and  welcome  ;  and  the  most  extreme  Presbyterian, 
from  his  point  of  view,  would  have  only  gained  enlarged 
authority  for  a  ministry  which  he  believed  to  be  already  valid 
and  regular.  As  in  a  marriage  of  rival  houses,  former  causes 
of  warfare  would  disappear,  and  the  contracting  parties  hence- 
forth would  have  common  aims  and  interests. 

Nor  would  there  be  anything  disingenuous  or  very  novel 
in  a  concurrent  ordination  thus  understood  to  represent  Pres- 
byterians and  Episcopalians.  Episcopalians  see  something 
like  it  whenever  a  postulant  brings  with  him  the  commenda- 
tion of  twelve  of  his  former  co-presbyters.  Presbyterians  see 
something  like  it,  whenever  an  Episcopal  minister  after  due 
examination  receives  the  authority  of  presbytery.  Both  Pres- 
byterians and  Episcopalians  see  something  like  it,  whenever 
High  and  Low  Church  bishops  and  presbyters  unite  in  con- 
ferring holy  orders.  What  would  be  the  essential  difference, 
either  in  intention  or  in  effect,  between  coordination  in  this 
last  case  and  in  the  case  before  described  ? 

The  difficulty  would  not  be  in  the  rite  of  ordination  so 
much  as  in  the  sphere  of  jurisdiction.  And  there  it  might 
not  prove  insuperable,  if  met  cautiously  and  by  degrees.  The 
connection  might  first  be  made  where  there  would  be  least 


I02  The  Four  Articles  of  Church  Unity. 

embarrassment.  On  foreign  mission  fields,  surely  such  ordi- 
nations ought  not  to  bring  any  conflict  of  presbyterial  and 
episcopal  jurisdiction.  On  home  mission  fields  there  are  as 
yet  no  vested  rights  and  interests  to  prevent  an  arranged  coin- 
cidence of  jurisdiction.  In  the  public  service  of  the  Army 
and  Navy,  and  in  purely  academic  positions,  the  coincidence 
would  seem  to  be  already  practicable.  There  would  be  no 
more  dancrer  of  free  lances  then  than  now  in  this  free  coun- 
try.  Moreover  coordination  would  make  re-ordination  easy 
and  reputable,  when  desirable.  Gradually,  as  such  examples 
became  familiar  and  contagious,  the  parishes  and  presbyteries 
within  a  synod  or  diocese  would  come  under  bishops  of  their 
own  choice  through  their  own  action.  At  length,  by  such  a 
reunion  of  presbytery  and  episcopacy  in  all  denominations, 
the  very  core  of  Protestantism  would  be  unified  on  a  church 
basis,  and  could  bring  its  crude  remainder  under  potent 
church  influences.  The  chief  ecclesiastical  bodies  in  the  land, 
all  the  historic  Reformed  churches,  would  stand  compacted 
as  a  solid  phalanx  against  sectarianism  on  the  one  side  and 
infidelity  on  the  other. 

Ideal  Fulfilment  of  Church  Unity. 
In  order  to  complete  this  ideal  sketch,  let  us  now  imagine 
the  Lambeth  articles  of  unity  to  have  been  thus  adopted  by 
the  chief  Christian  bodies  between  the  extremes  of  Protes- 
tantism and  Catholicism.  In  that  event,  the  historic  episco- 
pate would  have  been  extended  over  all  congregational, 
presbyterial,  and  episcopal  denominations ;  but  those  very 
names  would  have  lost  their  sectarian  meaning,  and  serve 
only  to  indicate  organic  members  and  functions  in  the  ec- 
clesiastical body.  The  Apostolic  and  Nicene  Creeds  would 
have  been  accepted,  the  one  as  a  symbol  of  church  member- 
ship, and  the  other  as  a  sufficient  statement  of  the  Christian 
faith ;  but  while  some  communions,  according  to  their  origin, 
might  still  train  under  the  polemic  standards  of  Augsburg, 
Heidelberg,  Geneva,  and  Westminster,  other    communions 


Slow   Growth  of  Church   Unity.  103 

might  be  content  to  display  such  standards  as  mere  antique 
trophies  in  the  castle  of  orthodoxy.  The  two  sacraments  of 
our  Lord  would  be  everywhere  ministered  with  His  appointed 
words  and  elements ;  but  if  in  such  ministration  some  par- 
ishes might  still  keep  the  Prayer-Book  intact  with  its  Protest- 
ant and  Catholic  formularies  compacted  as  a  finished  product 
of  liturgic  lore  and  skill,  yet  other  parishes  might  choose  only 
its  Protestant  formularies,  the  Exhortations,  Confessions, 
Prayers,  Thanksgivings,  Lessons,  and  Commandments  de- 
rived from  the  Lord's  Day  Service  of  the  Reformers,  popular 
in  style,  and  tending  to  spirituality  in  worship ;  while  still 
other  parishes  might  prefer  the  Catholic  formularies,  Matins 
and  Evensong,  Litany,  Holy  Communion,  with  their  Versi- 
cles,  Kyries,  and  Glorias,  serving  as  an  Englished  Breviary 
and  Missal,  choral  in  structure,  and  admitting  of  the  highest 
artistic  embellishment  when  freed  from  their  Protestant  accre- 
tions.^ In  a  word,  the  four  articles  would  have  become  rally- 
inof  centers  for  all  our  chief  denominational  varieties  of  doc- 
trine  and  ritual,  and  served  to  reconcile  a  just  Protestantism 
with  a  true  Catholicism  in  one  reunited  Church  of  the  United 
States.  Meanwhile,  too,  let  us  hope,  the  great  Roman 
Church,  no  longer  antagonistic,  already  possessed  of  the  es- 
sential principles  of  unity — the  Scriptures,  the  Creeds,  the 
two  Sacraments,  and  the  Episcopate — and  being  modified  by 
American  influences,  would  be  ready  to  connect  her  old 
Catholicism  with  our  new  Catholicism,  under  the  mild  prim- 
acy of  her  Chief  Pastor,  in  defense  of  a  common  faith,  a  com- 
mon country,  and  a  common  civilization. 

Slow  Growth  of  Church  Unity. 
The  approach  to  Church  unity  must  be  slow,  and  the  way 
may  be  long  and  difficult.     Not  in  one  generation,  perhaps 
not  in  several  generations,  can  it  be  effected ;    not  by  spas- 
modic efforts,  hostile  to  all  religious  life  and  growth ;  not  by 

^  See  Essay  VIII,  in  this  volume. 


I04  The  Four  Articles  of  CJnirch  Unity. 

sporadic  conversions,  always  personal  in  their  significance, 
sometimes  dubious,  never  unifying;  not  by  coalitions  with 
sectarian  fragments,  tending  only  to  denominational  aggran- 
disement and  encumbering  the  ecclesiastical  body  with  un- 
digested material.  No  :  Church  unity  can  only  be  attained 
by  a  steady  growth  of  Church  principles  in  all  denominations, 
by  a  generous  recognition  of  Church  institutions  wherever 
found,  Congregational  and  Presbyterial  as  well  as  Episcopal ; 
and  by  a  noble  comprehension  of  such  principles  and  institu- 
tions, together  with  their  respective  adherents,  within  one 
large  and  tolerant  Church  system.  Confederation  may  play 
its  part  in  some  stages  of  the  organic  process  ;  not  decreeing 
unity  by  treaty  or  statute,  but  ratifying  its  spontaneous 
achievements ;  and  consolidation  may  appear  at  the  goal  of 
the  process;  not  as  merging  different  denominations  in  the 
Episcopal  Church,  or  in  the  Presbyterian  Church,  or  in  the 
Roman  Church,  but  only  as  merging  all  churches  and  de- 
nominations in  the  one  American  Catholic  Church. 

The  outlook  for  Church  unity  at  the  present  time  may  not 
seem  very  hopeful.  If  we  confine  our  attention  to  passing 
occurrences  it  will  appear  quite  discouraging.  Religious 
controversy  has  broken  out  afresh  in  some  of  the  Churches, 
while  yet  they  were  devising  means  of  agreement.  Even 
the  words  of  peace  from  Chicago  and  Lambeth,  having  since 
been  surcharged  with  partisan  meaning  and  distorted  by  sec- 
tarian misapprehension,  have  become  like  rallying  standards 
hidden  in  the  smoke  of  battle.  But  let  us  not  judge  by 
superficial  and  local  signs.  Great  religious  movements  must 
be  measured  by  the  march  of  generations  through  centuries, 
not  by  current  events  of  the  day  and  the  hour.  If  we  will 
take  into  view  the  historic  past  together  with  the  present,  we 
shall  see  that  the  entire  Protestant  body,  for  more  than  a 
hundred  years,  has  been  steadily  recoiling  from  the  extreme 
sectarianism  into  which  it  was  driven  by  the  impulses  of  the  Re- 
formation, and  that  returning  Church  unity  is  made  inevitable 
by  the  logic  of  tendencies,  if  not  yet  by  the  logic  of  events. 


Decline  of  the  De^iominational  Spirit.         105 

Logical  Tendencies  to  Church  Unity. 
First  among  such  logical  tendencies  is  the  decline  of  the 
polemic  spirit.  Despite  some  present  appearances  this  is  not 
a  polemic  age.  Theological  controversy  is  not  now,  as  it 
once  was,  the  most  serious  pursuit  of  life,  when  men  crossed 
swords  over  a  dogmatic  distinction  and  consigned  heretical 
writers  with  their  books  to  the  flames.  Theological  contro- 
versy is  no  longer  the  wordy  combat  that  it  was  among  the 
divines  of  the  last  generation,  when  rival  schools  flew  apart 
as  hostile  churches.  Nothing  is  now  more  censured  and 
deprecated  than  such  controversy.  Bishops,  Presbyteries, 
and  Councils  are  slow  in  bringing  erring  brethren  to  book, 
although  the  questions  are  as  vital  as  incarnation,  probation, 
and  inspiration.  When  the  Church  trial  does  come,  the  call 
to  orthodoxy  is  blended  with  cries  for  liberty  and  peace.  This 
is  not  the  polemic,  but  the  irenic  period  in  the  history  of 
doctrine.  The  age  of  division  is  gone ;  that  of  reunion  has 
come.  Christian  divines,  meeting  in  conferences,  alliances, 
congresses,  are  trying  to  see  how  much  they  agree  rather  than 
how  much  they  differ.  And  the  spirit  of  fraternity  which  is 
abroad  among  them  will  be  satisfied  with  nothing  short  of 
true  unity. 

Decline  of  the  Denominational  Spirit. 
Another  of  the  logical  tendencies  toward  church  unity  is 
the  decline  of  the  denominational  spirit.  This  has  largely 
ceased  to  be  a  mere  sectarian  spirit.  The  denominations  do 
indeed  continue  among  us,  with  their  denominational  titles 
and  emblems  conspicuously  paraded,  especially  on  anniver- 
sary occasions  and  in  convivial  moments.  But  some  of  them 
have  lost  their  raison  d'etre  by  being  translated  to  the  New 
World,  where  their  Dutch,  German,  French,  and  Scotch  dia- 
lects are  no  longer  spoken,  and  their  political  environment 
has  become  wholly  American.  Others  have  lost  their  secta- 
rian bitterness  with  the  dying  out  of  the  polemic  feuds  which 


io6  The  Four  Ai^ticles  of  ChiL7^ch  Unity. 

made  them  Lutheran,  Calvinistic,  and  Wesleyan,  and  through 
the  social  intercourse  of  their  adherents.  All  of  them  have 
departed  from  their  primitive  standards  and  usages,  and  now 
linger  as  little  more  than  mere  anachronisms.  There  is  not 
one  of  them  that  would  be  recognized  by  their  respective 
founders  and  fathers,  the  Puritan,  the  Covenanter,  the  Meth- 
odist of  a  century  ago.  Now,  the  moment  any  system  begins 
to  be  thus  false  to  its  own  historic  life  and  traditions,  that 
moment  it  begins  to  die  and  its  self-laudation  is  but  a  sign  of 
its  decadence.  Already  it  is  becoming  unpopular,  not  to  say 
unchristian,  to  assert  bald  denominationalism  against  church 
unity ;  and  the  disappearance  of  denominationalism  is  the 
disappearance  of  the  last  obstacle  to  church  unity. 

Revival  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Spirit. 
With  the  decline  of  the  polemic  and  denominational  spirit 
has  come  a  wonderful  rise  and  growth  of  the  ecclesiastical 
spirit.  Throughout  the  Christian  world  there  is  a  great 
revival  of  churchly  ideas  and  catholic  usages.  Beginning 
fifty  years  ago  in  the  school  of  Keble  and  Pusey,  it  has  passed 
from  the  Church  of  England  into  the  Church  of  Scotland. 
Even  in  that  stronghold  of  Presbyterian  worship,  St.  Giles' 
Church,  at  Edinburgh,  the  visitor  to-day  will  find  all  the  cor- 
rect appliances  of  high  ritual ;  an  altar  clothed  in  the  color  of 
the  church  season;  lessons  read  from  an  eagle-lectern;  creed 
and  psalter  musically  rendered  ;  a  sermon  on  some  Tractarian 
theme  ;  and  mayhap  the  very  collect  to  which  Jennie  Geddes 
so  forcibly  responded.  Our  own  churches  are  feeling  a  like 
reaction.  The  Puritan  of  our  time  loves  to  call  his  meeting- 
house a  church  ;  keeps  Christmas  and  Good  Friday  as  well 
as  Thanksgiving  and  Fast  Day ;  and  sometimes  forgets  the 
local  in  the  historic  church.  If  he  becomes  a  Unitarian,  he 
has  churchly  tastes  and  affinities.  The  Hollander  is  restor- 
ing his  antique  liturgy.  The  Lutheran  is  looking  after  his 
lost  episcopate.  The  Methodist  is  listening  to  a  learned  min- 
istry with   liturgical  aids   to  devotion.     The   Presbyterian  is 


Pop2ilar   Tendencies  to   CJuu^ch   Unity.         107 

reclaiming  his  version  of  the  Prayer-book  and  pondering  the 

advantages    of    episcopacy.     The    churchly    Episcopalian    is 

going  to  confession   and  early  mass  and  looking  forward  to 

the  archbishopric.     Many    Protestants  would    like  to    have 

brotherhoods    and    sisterhoods,   and    can    heartily  join    our 

Roman  Catholic  friends  in  praising  SS.  Augustine,  Aquinas, 

and  Bernard,  and  even  the  Holy  Father  himself  in  his  present 

American  policy.     There  is  not  a  Christian  denomination  in 

the  land  which  is  not  becoming  more  or  less  consciously 

ecclesiastical  in  its  aims  and  tendencies.     And  the  growth  of 

the  ecclesiastical  spirit  simply  means  the  growth  of  church 

unity. 

Popular  Tendencies  to  Church  Unity. 

Besides  logical  tendencies  to  Church  unity  among  Chris- 
tian scholars  and  thinkers,  we  may  discern  certain  more  pop- 
ular tendencies,  none  the  less  potent,  because  unconscious, 
and  even  illogical.  Unlike  their  educated  leaders  the  Chris- 
tian masses  are  moving  toward  unity,  not  by  the  slow  steps 
of  reasoning,  but  with  the  swiftness  of  intuition  and  the  force 
of  passion.  Sometimes  they  may  seem  to  be  unreasonable 
and  blind  in  their  impatience  of  all  existing  restraints  and 
obstacles.  Paradoxical  as  it  may  sound,  they  are  even  now 
ready  for  the  Lambeth  proposals  without  knowing  it,  and 
while  repudiating  each  one  of  them.  Do  they  not  cling 
to  the  Holy  Scriptures  as  the  only  rule  of  faith,  while  seiz- 
ing those  Scriptures  as  if  handed  down  out  of  Heaven  and 
utterly  ignoring  the  historic  Church  through  which  alone 
they  have  acquired  them  ?  Do  they  not  confess  the  Christian 
facts  and  truths  set  forth  in  the  Apostolic  and  Nicene  Creeds, 
while  refusing  either  to  say  or  sing  those  creeds,  and  treating 
them  as  mere  ritualistic  forms?  Do  they  not  receive  the  two 
Sacraments  of  Christ  with  His  own  instituting  words  and 
emblems,  while  rejecting  the  solemn  and  tender  liturgy  which 
has  preserved  those  Sacraments  amid  the  prayers  and  praises 
of  saints  and  martyrs  in  all  ages?  Do  they  not  call  upon 
Congregationalists,  Presbyterians,  and  Episcopalians  to  have 


io8  The  Four  Articles  of  Oiurch  Unity, 

done  with  their  trivial  disputes  and  come  together  like  Chris- 
tians in  one  church,  while  still  sneering  at  an  all-unifying 
episcopate  as  but  the  dream  of  a  itw  sentimental  ecclesiastics  ? 
In  a  word,  although  casting  aside  the  words  "  one  Catholic 
and  Apostolic  Church  "  as  rags  of  popery,  yet  are  they  not 
in  heart  and  hope  ever  yearning  after  what  is  meant  by  the 
words  "one  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church"?  Some  day 
these  verbal  disguises  by  which  they  are  hidden  from  one 
another  and  kept  apart  will  melt  away  like  mists  in  the  sunrise. 

The  Coming  Campaign  of  Education. 
It  has  been  well  said  that  we  are  entering  "  a  campaign  of 
education."     In  the  most  elementary  sense,  we  all  need  infor- 
mation,— clergymen  as  well  as  laymen,  Presbyterians  as  well 
as  Congregationalists,  Episcopalians  as  well  as  Presbyterians, 
Catholics  as  well  as  Protestants.     All  churches  and  denomi- 
nations need  to  become  better  acquainted  with  one  another. 
Therefore,  it  is  with  a  wise  forethought  that  the  Lambeth 
Conference  "  recommends  as  of  great  importance,  in  tending 
to  bring  about  reunion,  the  dissemination  of  information  "  not 
only  "  respecting  the  standards  of  doctrine  and  the  formularies 
in   use  in  the  Anglican  Church,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  re- 
specting the  authoritative  standards  of  doctrine,  worship,  and 
government  adopted  by  the  other  bodies  of  Christians    into 
which  the  English-speaking  races  are  divided."     The  former 
part  of  this  Recommendation  has  already  found  its  fulfillment 
in   a  "  Church  Unity  Society,"  which  cannot  be  too   highly 
praised  or  too  vigorously  pressed  forward  in  its  high  mission. 
The  latter  part  of  the  Recommendation  might  find  fulfillment 
in  a  less  formal  association  or  circle,  freed  from  any  suspicion 
of  denominational  propagandism  by  being  composed  of  rep- 
resentatives of  the  three  polities.  Congregational  and  Presby- 
terial  as  well  as  Episcopal,  and  aiming  to  give  to  the  public 
only  the  results  of  special  research  and  studious  conference. 

But  more  even  than  information  do  we  need  that  spirit  of 
prayer  out  of  which  alone  can  be  born  a  true  unity.     Such  a 


The  Coming  Campaign  of  Education.         109 

spirit  will  dispose  us  to  minimize  our  differences  and  magnify 
our  agreements.  Such  a  spirit  will  melt  away  our  prejudices 
and  jealousies.  The  need  of  such  a  spirit  has  been  recognized 
by  the  highest  Presbyterian  authority,  and  the  highest  Epis- 
copal authority  has  already  voiced  it  for  us  in  words  which 
express  the  desire  of  all  Christian  hearts  : — 

"  O  God,  the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  our  only 
Saviour,  the  Prince  of  Peace  ;  give  us  grace  seriously  to  lay 
to  heart  the  great  danger  we  are  in  by  our  unhappy  divisions. 
Take  away  all  hatred  and  prejudice,  and  whatsoever  else  may 
hinder  us  from  godly  union  and  concord,  that  as  there  is  but 
one  Body  and  one  Spirit,  and  one  hope  of  our  calling,  one 
Lord,  one  Faith,  one  Baptism,  one  God  and  Father  of  us  all : 
so  we  may  henceforth  be  all  of  one  heart  and  of  one  soul, 
united  in  one  holy  bond  of  Truth  and  Peace,  of  Faith  and 
Charity,  and  may  with  one  mind  and  one  mouth  glorify  Thee, 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.     Amen." 


IV. 


DENOMINATIONAL  VIEWS   OF   THE 
QUADRILATERAL. 


IV. 

DENOMINATIONAL   VIEWS  OF  THE  QUADRILATERAL. 

The  foregoing  essay  has  been  made  the  subject  of  a 
symposium  of  various  clergymen,  under  the  title  of  "  Many 
Voices  Concerning  the  Historic  Episcopate."  These  voices, 
when  heard  apart,  make  pleasant  melody  and  at  times  even 
their  discords  seem  to  blend  in  a  higher  harmony.  The  con- 
tributors to  the  symposium  are  agreed  in  lamenting  our 
unhappy  divisions,  in  recognizing  unity  as  normal  in  the  body 
of  Christ,  and  in  looking  and  longing  for  its  fulfillment.  It  is 
only  when  the  question  of  method  is  raised  that  the  disagree- 
ment begins. 

I  must  be  content  with  a  general  acknowledgment  once  for 
all,  of  the  many  complimentary  remarks  upon  the  essay,  and 
proceed  at  once,  if  I  may  without  presumption,  to  estimate  the 
valuable  opinions  brought  together,  in  their  bearing  upon  the 
problem  of  Church  Unity.  This  will  be  no  easy  task,  since 
the  variety  of  these  opinions  is  confusing  and  the  aim  of  their 
authors  is  not  always  apparent.  They  will  naturally  group 
themselves  for  our  purpose,  according  to  the  three  church 
polities  which  they  severally  represent,  as  Congregational, 
Presbyterial,  and  Episcopal. 

Congregational  Opinions, 
At  the  head  of  the  Congregational  group  is  the  admirable 
introduction  of  Dr.  Bradford.'     The  way  to  the   question  is 

1  The  Rev.  Amory  H.  Bradford,  D.D.,  Montclair,  N.  J.,  Editor  of  "  Christian 
Literature  and  the  Review  of  the  Churches ' '  : — 

"  The  Chicago-Lambeth  propositions  are  not  understood  by  other  denomina- 
8  113 


114  Views  of  the   Quadrilateral. 

here  opened  by  emphasizing  the  need  for  church  unity  as  seen 
in  the  unchristian  rivalries  of  the  denominations,  in  the  piteous 
appeals  for  missionary  and  humanitarian  effort,  and  in  the 
comparatively  trivial  differences  which  separate  our  churches. 
When  looking  for  the  remedy,  Dr.  Bradford  has  the  sagacity, 
candor,  and  charity  to  see  that  the  Lambeth  proposals  are  not 
to  be  put  aside  as  measures  of  mere  church  aggrandizement  or 
denominational  propagandism,  but  maybe  considered,  especi- 
ally the  fourth  article,  as  affording  a  practicalif  not  acceptable 
basis  of  unification.  His  objection  that  they  might  produce  a 
mere  formal  unity  without  the  fullness  of  spiritual  concord, 
though  true  in  itself,  is  an  objection  which  must  ever  inhere  in 
all  our  schemes  of  church  unity  and  is  not  peculiar  to  the 
scheme  now  under  consideration.  Such  concord  did  not  exist 
even  in  the  golden  age  of  the  undivided  Apostolic  Church. 

The  new  verbal  distinction,  which  Dr.  Bradford  sanctions, 
between  the  Kingdom  and  the  Church  of  Christ,  if  it  means 
more  than  the  old  distinction  between  the  invisible  and  visible 
church,  does  not  seem  to  me  quite  scriptural  and  may  prove 
misleading  when  pushed  to  its  issues.  Instead  of  forcing  a 
breach  between  the  teachings  of  our  Saviour  and  those  of  His 
Apostles  on  this  subject  I  would  rather  combine  them  as 
consistent,  complemental,  and  inseparable.  If  the  distinction 
be  pressed  it  will  be  found  that  the  divine  ideal  of  the  Church 
is  depicted  in  more  sacred  terms  than  the  Kingdom.  The 
Church  is  the  very  "  body  of  Christ  "  and  "  bride  of  the  Lamb," 
while  the  Kingdom  scarcely  suggests  such  unity,  life  and 
love.  In  fact,  the  Kingdom  of  Christ  would  have  been  a 
mere  abstraction  without  His  Church,  and  His  Church  was 


tions.  We  are  not  convinced  that  union  is  possible  by  means  of  them,  but  we 
gladly  recognize  that  they  are  issued  in  the  most  catholic  and  fraternal  spirit,  and 
we  can  see  clearly  that  the  prominence  which  they  give  to  the  Historic  Episcopate 
is  not  because  it  distinguishes  the  Episcopal  Church,  but  because  in  the  opinion 
of  the  Bishops  it  belongs  to  the  universal  Church  of  Christ.  These  propositions 
are  worthy  of  a  more  careful  consideration  than  they  have  yet  received  from  the 
various  denominations  of  Christians  in  Great  Britain  and  America." 


Congj'egational  Opinions.  115 

simply  His  organized  Kingdom, — organized  in  part  by  Him- 
self and  then  more  fully  by  the  Apostles  under  His  teaching 
and  guidance.  That  first  organization,  whether  it  be  viewed 
as  authoritative  or  simply  as  exemplary,  has  confessedly, 
like  Holy  Scripture  itself,  been  more  or  less  corrupted  and 
perverted.  For  example,  it  involved  Congregational,  Pres- 
byterial,  and  Episcopal  elements  which  now  exist  as  dis- 
membered and  conflicting  denominations  ;  and  the  practical 
question  before  us  is  whether  they  may  not  be  organically 
re-combined  by  means  of  the  Historic  Episcopate. 

Dr.  Beach,^  with  his  fervent  enthusiasm  and  spiritual  in- 
sight, discerns  these  three  elemental  polities  as  germs  of  unity, 
existing  potentially  in  our  Protestant  Christianity;  empha- 
sizes the  futility  of  mere  sentimental  schemes  of  unity,  and 
voices  prophetically  the  deep-seated  yearning  of  the  age  amid 
all  its  discords,  for  catholicity  as  well  as  truth  and  freedom. 
It  is  encouraging  to  hear  so  stirring  a  call  to  unity  out  of  the 
heart  of  New  England  culture. 

While  I  might  not  fully  agree  with  Mr.  Cooley  ^  in  looking 
forward  to  a  united  church  as  in  prophetic  vision  or  in  look- 
ing backward  to  it  with  a  mere  antiquarian  interest,  yet  I  can 
cordially  concur  in  his  thoughtful  and  practical  view,  that  of 
the  three  factors  of  organized  Christianity,  Episcopacy  rather 


1  The  Rev.  David  N.  Beach,  D.D.,  Cambridge,  Mass.  :— 

«'  I  am  confident  that  the  intensity  of  the  yearning  after  unity  throughout  large 
sections  of  Christendom,  is  very  much  minimized  by  many  persons  who  write 
upon  the  subject.  .  .  .  The  new  education,  the  new  science,  the  new  phil- 
osophy, the  new  grasp  of  our  age  on  essentials  and  on  reality,  carry  this  soul's 
cry  with  them  as  an  inevitable  intellectual  corollary." 

2  The  Rev.  William  Forbes  Cooley,  .Stanley,  N.  J.  :— 

"  Why,  in  the  face  of  the  historic  examples  of  the  Church  of  the  Ante-Nicene 
period,  the  Mediaeval  Church  and  the  more  recent  phenomenal  advance  of  the 
Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  should  we  shut  our  eyes  to  the  fact  that  in  periods 
of  outward  exigency,  when  great  work  is  to  be  done  and  gi-eat  secular  foes  are  to 
be  fought,  rather  than  problems  of  faith  to  be  solved  or  liberty  to  be  won,  the 
Episcopate,  be  its  origin  what  it  may,  has  by  its  victories  and  its  services  to  the 
Church  vindicated  its  claim  to  divine  sanction?  " 


1 1 6  Views  of  the   Quadrilateral. 

than  Presbytery  or  Congregationalism  is  the  chief  need  of 
the  church  of  to-day.  But  the  lesson  of  history,  as  I  read 
it,  is  against  the  obliteration  or  inversion  of  any  one  of  these 
ecclesiastical  elements,  and  a  true  Puritanism  may  consist 
with  all  of  them,  when  they  are  freed  from  mere  false  ecclesi- 
asticism. 

Dr.  Stimson^  puts  himself  genially  in  sympathy  with  the 
growing  spirit  of  church  unity.  Perhaps  he  overlooks  the 
fact  that  the  three  "  prophets  of  the  movement "  may  not  be 
so  much  opposed  as  complemental  to  one  another  in  the 
methods  of  unification  which  they  respectively  advocated — 
the  "  confederation  "  of  Prof  Briggs  and  the  "  consolidation  " 
of  Dr.  Huntington  being  simply  different  stages  in  the  same 
social  process  of  organic  reunion  and  growth  which  I  have 
advocated.  His  admission  that  the  Lambeth  articles  are 
clarifying  the  views  of  some  exclusive  bodies  of  Christians 
is  as  just  as  it  is  frank  ;  but  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  he  will  not 
be  content  to  remain  as  a  mere  sympathetic  spectator  of  the 
discussions  going  on  in  such  bodies,  but  find  in  Congre- 
gational bodies  also  the  need  and  motive  for  church  unity 
rather  than  for  mere  sentimental  fellowship. 

In  the  present  movement  the  laity  are  in  advance  of  the 
clergy,  partly  because  they  do  not  share  the  clerical  sensitive- 
ness as  to  the  vexed  question  of  orders  and  also  because  they 
are  in  more  practical  contact  with  the  evils  of  sectarianism. 
For  this  reason  the  brief  letter  of  Mr.  Seward^  is  most  signifi- 


1  The  Rev.  Henry  A.  Stimson,  D.D.,  Tabernacle  Church,  New  York: — 
"The  Lambeth  Articles,  whatever  ultimate   end   they  may  serve  in  bringing 

about  Christian  unity,  are  accomplishing  one  good  in  enabling  all  Christians  to 
clarify  and  adjust  their  own  views  of  Christian  truth  and  in  helping  some  bodies 
of  Christians  who  are  to-day  exceptionally  exclusive,  to  get  a  new  light  upon 
their  attitude  toward  their  fellows." 

2  Theodore  F.  Seward  Esq. ,  President  of  the  Brotherhood  of  Christian  Unity : 
"  When  the  question  of  an   actual  union  of  Christian  denominations  is  con- 
sidered, and   a  system  is  sought  which   will,  in  the  course  of  time,  change   a 
divided  Christendom  into  a  united  Christendom,  it  appears  to  me  that  Dr.  Shields' 
position  is  impregnable." 


Congregational  Opinions.  1 1 7 

cant  and  hopeful  as  coming  from  an  acknowledged  leader  of 
the  Christian  people  who  already  foresees  in  church  unity 
the  fulfillment  of  his  own  zealous  labors  for  the  brotherhood 
of  Christian  unity. 

Amid  these  cheering  voices  President  Gates  ^  raises  the 
startling  query,  Is  church  unity  a  good  thing  in  itself?  A 
good  thing!  Is  it  a  good  thing  that  the  body  of  Christ 
should  appear  dismembered  ?  Is  it  a  good  thing  that  the 
household  of  faith  should  be  divided  against  itself?  Is  it  a 
good  thing  that  the  invisible  community  of  saints  should 
make  itself  visible  only  in  sects  and  schisms,  with  rivalries 
and  conflicts?  Would  the  healing  of  such  schisms  and  the 
removal  of  such  conflicts  be  a  mere  "  trivial  step,"  an  "  unim- 
portant matter,"  a  "  thing  for  ecclesiastics  to  play  with  "?  Is 
there  "  no  divine  necessity  "  of  manifesting  to  the  world  that 
oneness  of  believers  in  Christ  which  He  likened  to  His  one- 
ness with  the  Father,  and  for  which  He  prayed  as  affording 
demonstrative  proof  of  His  whole  earthly  mission  ?  Church 
unity  is  set  before  us  in  the  Scriptures  not  merely  as  a  good 
end  in  itself,  but  as  one  of  the  highest  ends  of  Christian  hope 
and  effort.  Instead  of  being  an  incident  or  expedient,  it  is  pre- 
sented as  an  expressed  attribute  of  the  church  itself,  which  is 
essential  to  its  own  normal  perfection,  and  without  which  it 
must  remain  as  a  family  broken  by  feuds  or  a  body  distracted 
with  deliriums.  If  the  church  had  no  mission,  such  unity 
would  be  a  good  thing ;  and  when  its  mission  is  fulfilled,  it 
will  be  the  most  beautiful  and  glorious  thing  in  the  spiritual 
universe,  even  the  realized  ideal  of  Pentecost,  the  marriage  sup- 
per of  the  Lamb  and  the  nuptials  of  the  new  earth  and  heaven. 

^  President  George  A.  Gates,  D.D. ,  Iowa  College,  Grinnell,  Iowa  : — 
"  If  the  Church  is  an  end  in  itself,  we  can  get  on  quite  comfortably  as  we  are. 
Whether  we  have  one  denomination  or  a  thousand  is  of  little  consequence,  so 
long  as  each  one  is  contented  in  its  own  work,  and  satisfied  to  build  itself  up  in 
its  own  way.  But  it  ought  to  be  impossible  to  consider  church  unity  as  an  end. 
That  is  a  matter  interesting  enough  for  us  as  ecclesiastics  to  work  or  piay  with, 
but  no  divine  necessity  seems  to  be  about  it." 


1 1 8  Views  of  the   Quadrilateral. 

When  President  Gates  speaks  of  the  main  argument  of  the 
essay  his  words  of  praise  are  so  cordial  and  generous  that  I 
regret  the  more  any  difference  of  view,  and  hope  it  may,  after 
all,  be  more  verbal  than  real.  As  to  the  practical  value  of 
church  unity,  he  will  find  that  it  has  been  referred  to,  wher- 
ever the  connection  required  it,  as  a  remedy  for  the  immense 
waste,  loss,  and  conflict  in  our  denominational  charities  and 
missions,  for  the  evils  of  sectarianism  and  infidelity,  and  for 
the  social  anarchy  of  our  times.  In  other  writings,  also,  I 
have  more  fully  shown  that  without  organic  unity  the  church 
can  never  accomplish  its  mission  as  the  teacher,  conservator, 
and  regenerator  of  human  society.^ 

It  is  quite  probable  that  some  sincere  Christians  are  not 
merely  inappreciative  of  church  unity,  but  do  not  really  want 
it  upon  any  terms.  They  seem  to  be  still  under  the  influence 
of  anti-church  prejudices,  inherited  from  ancestral  conflicts 
with  a  false  ecclesiasticism  in  the  Old  World.  Anything  like 
a  union  of  denominations  in  one  church  system  would,  in  their 
view,  breed  such  ecclesiasticism  in  some  of  its  lowest  forms. 
Apparently,  there  is  nothing  they  dread  so  much  as  ecclesias- 
tical politics.  It  is  pleasant  to  find  that  Dr.  Ward,  if  taken 
seriously,  does  not  share  such  scruples.  He  proposes  to  dis- 
miss "  ideals  "  and  seize  the  question  as  an  ecclesiastical  poli- 
tician. He  tells  us  that  "  it  is  not  a  moral  or  religious  ques- 
tion particularly,"  but  "  one  of  practical  ecclesiastical  politics  ; " 
not  even  an  "  academical  question," but  a  problem  of  "eccle- 
siastical statesmanship."  And  he  has  given  an  example.  On 
behalf  of  some  future  Congregational  Council  he  has  formu- 
lated a  new  Quadrilateral,  in  lieu  of  the  four  articles  known 
as  the  Scriptures,  the  Creeds,  the  Sacraments,  and  the  His- 
toric Episcopate.  He  has  not,  indeed,  devised  any  new  sacred 
canon,  any  new  catholic  creed,  any  new  divine  sacrament,  any 
new  historic  ministry.  He  has  only  framed  four  new  abstract 
propositions  to  take  the  place  of  canon,  creed,  ritual,  and  polity, 

^  See  last  Essay  in  this  volume. 


Congregational  Opinions.  1 1 9 

as  bonds  of  church  unity,  and  thus  supersede  the  effete  wisdom 
of  the  Christian  ages,  as  well  as  the  idealistic  dreams  of  sur- 
rounding Christendom,  by  one  stroke  of  the  pen  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal diplomacy. 

I  will  not  say  of  these  propositions  what  their  author  has 
said  of  the  overtures  from  Chicago  and  Lambeth,  that  "  they 
are  hardly  worth  discussing."  I  will  only  say  that  there  is  no 
need  to  discuss  them  or  even  to  state  them.  They  are  the 
pleasantries  of  an  ecclesiasticism  which  can  view  the  question 
of  church  unity  as  neither  a  moral  question  nor  a  religious 
question,  and  only  as  an  ecclesiastical  question  in  a  political 
sense. 

It  is  still  possible,  however,  to  view  it  as  a  moral  and  reli- 
gious question.  There  are  those  who  can  view  it  as  a  Chris- 
tian question,  even  the  highest  Christian  question  of  our  time. 
And  to  such  idealists  it  is  beginning  to  appear  as  a  very  prac- 
tical question, — I  had  almost  said,  as  a  question  of  practical 
politics  in  the  literal  sense.  Distant  as  the  reunion  of  Chris- 
tendom may  be  in  Greece  and  Rome,  the  Greeks  and  Romans 
themselves  are  at  our  own  door,  especially  the  Romans. 
Hopeless  as  it  might  seem  to  marshal  the  Salvation  Army 
within  the  Quadrilateral,  there  are  some  Christian  bodies 
almost  inside  without  as  yet  perceiving  it.  The  historic 
churches  of  the  Reformation  already  possess  the  canon,  the 
creeds,  and  the  sacraments,  and  are  in  various  stages  of  reac- 
tion toward  the  Historic  Episcopate.  Other  less  ecclesiastical 
denominations,  we  may  hope,  will  better  appreciate  these  exist- 
ing bonds  of  church  unity  as  they  become  familiar  with  them 
or  crrow  more  ecclesiastical  in  the  best  sense  of  the  word.  In- 
deed,  a  {^^  Congregationalists,  as  well  as  Presbyterians  and 
Episcopalians,  are  actually  studying  the  Lambeth  proposals 
and  find  them  intrinsically  worthy  of  consideration,  as  worthy 
of  consideration  as  if  they  had  emanated  from  the  Congrega- 
tional Council  or  from  the  Presbyterian  Assembly. 

Should  other  denominations  act  upon  Dr.  Ward's  sugges- 


1 20  Views  of  the   Quadi^ilateral. 

tion/  it  is  quite  certain  that  the  Baptist,  Congregationalist,  and 
Methodist  Churches  could  not  construct  any  platform  of 
church  unity,  strictly  so  called,  which  would  be  more  catholic, 
practical,  and  hopeful  than  the  Quadrilateral,  while  the 
Lutheran,  Reformed,  and  Presbyterian  Churches  could  not 
adopt  any  other  without  largely  ignoring  their  own  standards 
and  history,  which  already  contain  at  least  the  first  three  of 
its  articles. 

Unless  I  do  Dr.  Strong^  injustice  he  has  fallen  into  an  error 
common  to  many  who  hav^e  yet  to  examine  this  question  care- 
fully. True  church  unity  does  not  require  concession  or 
compromise,  but  only  mutual  toleration  and  fellowship  ;  and 
the  peculiar  value  of  the  Historic  Episcopate  is,  that  it  affords 
scope  as  well  as  basis  for  such  unity.  It  includes  both  of  the 
two  views  of  churchmanship  which  Dr.  Strong  attributes  to 
it;  but  it  excludes  neither  of  them,  and  could  not  exclude 
either  of  them  without  destroying  itself  If  evangelistic 
Christians  will  not  tolerate  and  fellowship  with  ritualistic 
Christians  in  the  same  church  system,  as  they  did  in  the  un- 
divided Church  of  the  Apostles,  then  there  maybe  an  end  of 
church  unity  so  far  as  they  are  concerned,  but  the  blame  of 

^  The  Rev.  William  Hayes  Ward,  D.D.,  Editor  of  the  Independent,  New- 
York  :  — 

"  The  Episcopalians  have  offered  their  ultimatum,  and  the  reception  it  has 
received  proves  that  there  is  no  hope  in  it  as  a  basis  of  union.  Now  let  Baptists 
offer  theirs,  Presbyterians  theirs,  Methodists  theirs,  Lutherans  theirs,  and  let  us 
see  whether  Episcopalians  will  be  any  more  ready  to  accept  these  than  other 
bodies  have  been  to  accept  theirs. ' ' 

^  The  Rev.  Josiah  Strong,  D.D.,  Secretary  of  the  Evangelical  Alliance, 
New  York : — 

•'  Evidently  the  position  of  Congregationalists  and  Baptists  is  diametrically 
opposed  to  that  of  those  who  deem  the  Historic  Episcopate  essential  to  the 
validity  of  clerical  orders  and  of  church  organization.  There  can  be  no  possi- 
bility of  compromise  between  them.  The  only  alternative  to  conflict  is  uncon- 
ditional surrender ;  and  Baptists  and  Congregationalists  could  not  surrender  so 
vital  a  point  without  deeming  themselves  disloyal  to  the  truth,  which  is  true  also 
of  all  non-Episcopal  churches." 


Co)igregational  Opinions.  1 2 1 

schism  will  not  rest  upon  their  ritualistic  fellow-Christians. 
Baptists  and  Congregationalists  are  not  asked  necessarily  to 
concede  immersion  and  autonomy,  nor  should  they  ask  their 
Episcopal  brethren  to  concede  the  Episcopate  as  now  defined, 
but  be  ready  to  practice  tolerance  and  fraternity  with  them  in 
the  household  of  faith. 

When  we  pass  to  the  Baptist  representatives  in  the  Congre- 
gational group  we  expect  to  meet  difficulties  which  are  doc- 
trinal and  ritual  in  their  nature  as  well  as  ecclesiastical.  And 
yet  the  voices  which  greet  us  are  in  the  tone  of  perfect  unity. 
Dr.  Boardman^  is  of  so  generous  and  catholic  a  spirit  that  one 
wishes  to  agree  with  every  word  that  he  writes.  And,  indeed, 
the  disagreements  arise  mainly  from  a  mere  difference  in  the 
point  of  view.  It  is  not  material  whether  we  speak  of  a 
"  reunion"  or  of  a  "  unification  "  of  Christendom,  if  only  we 
perceive  that  the  various  communions  of  the  one  Apostolic 
Church,  notwithstanding  their  internal  heresies  and  wrangles, 
did  not  excommunicate,  unchurch,  and  disfellowship  one 
another  after  the  fashion  of  our  times,  but  remained  in  com- 
pact unity  until  the  great  schism  between  the  Eastern  and 
Western  churches  and  the  greater  schisms  at  the  Reforma- 
tion. Nor  can  we  very  well  apply  our  Lord's  far-reaching, 
prophetic  prayer  to  the  few  trivial  disputes  among  His  Apostles 
and  Disciples.  If  we  will  only  keep  ever  before  us  the  Pen- 
tecostal ideal  of  church  unity  we  may  gladly  rejoice  with  Dr. 
Boardman  in  his  vivid  picture  of  a  membership  of  denomina- 
tions, as  well  as  individuals,  in  the  visible  body  of  Christ. 

The  claims  of  true  unity  are  also  faithfully  expressed  by 

^  The  Rev.  George  Dana  Boardman,  D.D.,  Philadelphia: — 
"  I  have  ventured  to  substitute  the  word  "  unification  "  for  the  word  "reunion." 
For  I  am  not  aware  that  Christendom  has  ever  been  united  in  such  a  way  as  to 
make  a  reunion  desirable.  The  sad  fact  seems  to  be  that  the  Church  of  the 
primitive  period,  instead  of  having  been,  as  we  so  often  fondly  imagine,  a  concord 
of  brothers,  was  largely  a  discord  of  wranglers.  *  *  *  Like  every  other 
thing  of  life,  it  began  in  infantile  imperfection,  but  subject  to  the  blessed  law  of 
growth  and  perfection.  Ideals,  always  excepting  the  one  perfect  Man,  are  ever 
before  us,  never  behind  us. ' ' 


122  Views  of  the   Quadrilateral. 

Dr.  Tyler^  in  his  scriptural  and  spiritual  letter.  I  think,  how- 
ever, that  the  Christian  unity  of  our  churches,  though  far 
from  being  perfect,  is  already  sufficient  for  the  work  of  church 
unity ;  and  it  will  decline  rather  than  increase,  if  allowed  to 
remain  as  a  vague  sentiment  without  some  organic  expres- 
sion. If  it  be  true  that  St.  Paul  bases  Christian  unity  or  spir- 
itual oneness  upon  Christ  alone,  yet  he  also  gives  us  a  lively 
picture  of  church  unity,  in  that  structure  which  is  built  upon 
the  Apostles  and  Prophets,  Jesus  Christ  Himself  being  the 
chief  corner  stone.  Some  of  us  begin  to  think  its  unfinished 
walls  and  arches  may  yet  find  their  keystone  in  the  Historic 
Episcopate.  The  "  Church  of  the  Disciples,"  which  Dr.  Tyler 
represents,  faithful  to  its  liberal  spirit,  has  proposed  the  Primi- 
tive Faith,  the  Primitive  Sacraments,  and  the  Primitive  Life 
as  essentials  of  Christian  unity ;  and  for  their  purpose  they 
are  excellent ;  but  for  the  purpose  of  church  unity  strictly  so 
called,  they  lack  organic  force,  and  ignore  the  ages  of  Chris- 
tian experience  and  providential  training  through  which  the 
church  has  passed  since  it  was  instituted  by  Christ  and  His 
Apostles. 

On  the  whole,  the  Congregationalist  utterances  are  very 
favorable  in  their  bearing  upon  Christian  unity  as  requisite  to 
church  unity.  Since  no  church  unity  can  be  real  and  lasting 
which  is  not  thoroughly  animated  with  Christian  unity  or 
spiritual  oneness,  all  agencies  and  associations  which  practi- 
cally promote  such  spiritual  oneness  ought  only  to  be  en- 
couraged and  fostered.  But  it  is  scarcely  conceivable  that 
historic  churches  should  now  find  it  their  duty  to  wait  for 
the  Young  Men's  Christian  Association,  the  King's  Daughters, 
and  the  societies  of  Christian  Endeavor  to  start  them  upon  a 
long  career  through  the  successive  stages  of  church  coopera- 

iThe  Rev.  B.  B.  Tyler,  D.D.  (Disciples  of  Christ),  New  York  :— 
"  Instead  of  saying  that  the  unity  for  which  Christ  prayed    '  rests  upon  an 
institution,  not  upon  doctrines '  (p.  90),  why  not  say  that  it  rests  upon  a  person  ? 
'  Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay  than  that  is  laid,  which  is  Christ  Jesus.'     And 
St.  Paul  was  discussing  this  very  subject  when  he  made  that  statement." 


Presbyterian   Opinio7is.  123 

tion,  church  federation,  and  church  unity .^  The  end  may  be 
more  directly  sought  by  massing  together  those  churches  of 
the  Reformation  which  represent  the  conservative  forces  of 
historic  Christianity,  in  the  hope  of  acting  favorably  upon  a 
false  ecclesiasticism  on  the  one  side  as  well  as  upon  a  crude 
evangelism  on  the  other. 

Presbyterian  Opinions. 

The  Presbyterian  voices  in  this  symposium  are  too  few  to 
be  fully  representative.  One  of  them,  however,  is  clear  and 
strong,  and  comes  from  a  quarter  of  the  field  where  the  need 
and  practicability  of  church  unity  are  most  apparent.  Dr. 
Reid,^  of  the  American  Presbyterian  Mission  in  China,  faith- 
fully represents  the  old  Presbyterian  doctrine  of  the  "  Catholic 
Visible  Church,"  and  vindicates  the  Episcopal  proposals  as 
not  only  generous  in  their  spirit,  but  adapted  to  Presbyterian 
principles  and  having  a  unifying  quality  throughout  Christen- 
dom. 

On  a  first  reading  of  the  able  and  valuable  argument  of  Dr. 
Waters,^  of  the  Reformed  Church,  I  thought  his  judgment 


1  The  Rev.  Lyman  Abbott,  D.D.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y.  :  — 

"  I  do  not  hope  much  from  debates  about  Church  union  and  conventions  to 
promote  it ;  but  I  hope  very  much  from  such  movements  as  the  Young  Men's 
Christian  Association,  the  King's  Daughters,  the  Societies  of  Christian  Endeavor, 
and  from  frequent  meeting  together  in  Christian  and  philanthropic  gatherings. 
Out  of  these  will  grow  gradually  that  unity  of  faith  which  is  the  indispensable 
pre-requisite  to  Church  cooperation,  and  out  of  Church  cooperation  Church 
federation,  and  out  of  Church  federation  Church  unity." 

2  The  Rev.  Gilbert  Reid,  American  Presbyterian  Mission,  China : — 

"  Because  the  Historic  Episcopate  is  made  one  of  the  points  of  the  basis,  this 
does  not  mean  that  the  Episcopal  Church  of  America  or  the  Church  of  England, 
with  all  their  canons,  rites,  ritual  and  personal  preferences,  is  made  the  basis.  It 
is  a  fair  offer  of  Church  union,  not  of  swallowing  up  or  being  swallowed." 

3  The  Rev.  David  Waters,  D.D.,  Reformed  Dutch  Church,  Newark,  N.  J.  : — 
"  Summing  up  the  whole  matter  and  setting  aside  any  objections  which  may  be 

made  to  the  adequacy  of  the  doctrinal  basis  as  something  which  might  be  over- 
come, it  is  to  my  mind  perfectly  clear  that  no  general  union  of  the  churches  can 
be  formed  on  the  basis  of  the  proposals  of  the  Lambeth  Conference  with  the 
statement  regarding  the  Historic  Episcopate  as  one  of  the  fundamental  articles  of 
the  basis  of  union." 


12  4  Views  of  the   QiLadrilatcral. 

adverse  to  the  feasibility  of  the  Lambeth  articles.  But,  after 
examining  it  more  carefully,  it  seems  susceptible  of  a  different 
construction.  While  he  deems  the  Apostolic  and  Nicene 
creeds  insufficient  as  a  statement  of  the  Reformed  doctrines, 
he  still  admits  them  to  be  sufficient  as  a  statement  of  the 
common  Christian  faith  of  a  united  church  in  which  different 
denominations  might  hold  supplementary  doctrines  not  incon- 
sistent with  those  catholic  creeds.  The  only  serious  objec- 
tion which  he  raises  has  reference  to  a  particular  view  of  the 
Historic  Episcopate,  which  is  not  required  by  that  expression 
itself,  which  many  Episcopalians  as  well  as  Presbyterians 
repudiate,  and  which  need  not,  therefore,  act  as  a  barrier  to 
the  combination  of  Presbytery  and  Episcopacy  in  a  united 
church. 

In  distinction  from  Congregationalism,  the  genius  of  Pres- 
byterianism  is  more  favorable  to  church  unity  than  to  church 
federation,  which  is  at  best  but  a  half-way  measure  and  often 
impracticable.  The  unification  of  the  Presbyterian  and  Epis- 
copal Churches  would  scarcely  any  more  interfere  with  vested 
interests  and  existing  institutions  than  federation,  and  would 
much  more  strengthen  the  cause  of  church  unity  than  a 
league  of  smaller,  younger  denominations,  which  offer  less  re- 
sistance to  the  unifying  process  simply  because  they  are  weak 
in  historic  and  ecclesiastical  character.  Moreover,  we  have 
been  trying  confederation  for  a  hundred  years  in  Bible, 
Mission,  and  Sunday-school  unions,  and  have  found  it  as  in- 
adequate as  it  proved  to  be  in  our  political  history.  It  is  to 
be  hoped  that  we  are  now  entering  a  peaceful  era  of  constitu- 
tional union  and  normal  growth. 

Episcopal  Opinions. 
The  few  Episcopal  contributors  represent  nearly  all  the 
forms  of  Episcopacy  which  are  concerned  in  the  question. 
It  would  have  been  a  great  advantage  had  Dr.  Crooks^  been 


1  Rev.  George  K.  Crooks,  D.D.,  Professor  in  Drew  Theological  Seminary: — 
' '  The  feeling  which  is  uppermost  in  my  mind  when  I  think  of  the  proposal,  is 


Episcopal  Opinions.  125 

able  to  write  more  fully  as  an  exponent  of  Methodist  Episco- 
pacy. In  his  brief  note,  I  think,  he  falls  into  the  common 
misapprehension  of  attributing  to  the  Historic  Episcopate  a 
theory  of  the  ministry  and  sacraments  which  it  does  not  ex- 
clusively require,  and  he  is,  therefore,  in  danger  of  present- 
ing the  Methodist  Episcopalian  as  really  more  obstructive  to 
church  unity  than  the  Protestant  Episcopalian. 

I  shall  not  be  able  to  do  justice  to  the  thoughtful,  generous, 
and  catholic-hearted  paper  of  Dr.  Huntington.^  Any  remain- 
ing differences,  as  he  states  them,  are  quite  trivial.  He  is  un- 
questionably right  in  claiming  that  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  now  holds  the  banner  of  unity  in  the  midst  of  our 
divided  American  Christianity,  and  is  entitled  to  the  leader- 
ship by  virtue  of  its  English  origin,  ancestral  connections,  and 
full  ecclesiastical  type.  But  it  would  need  to  undergo  great 
constitutional  changes  before  it  could  incorporate  with  itself 
such  vigorous  historic  bodies  as  the  Lutheran,  Reformed, 
and  Presbyterian  Churches,  and  it  might  by  such  changes 
depreciate  its  own  churchly  character.  Nor  are  those 
churches  likely  to  surrender  their  corporate  life  in  an  abrupt 
consolidation,  without  further  organic  growth  of  the.  latent 
ecclesiastical  qualities  which  they  traditionally  possess  and 
are  steadily  developing.  It  will  be  wise  to  treat  them  as  pro- 
fessed   churches,   not    as    mere   individual    Christians.      The 


that  the  Historic  Episcopate  is  Apostolic  Succession  disguised.  The  disguise 
imposes  on  the  unsuspecting,  and  is  used  as  a  means  of  making  what  would  be 
otherwise  offensive,  acceptable." 

1  The  Rev.  Wm.  R.  Huntington,  D.D.,  Rector  of  Grace  Church,  New 
York  :— 

[I  cannot  resist  quoting  the  following  remark  as  tending  to  justify  the  title  of 
this  work.] 

"  If  Dr.  Shields  had  done  nothing  more  than  coin  his  felicitous  phrase,  "  The 
United  Church  of  the  United  States,"  he  would  have  put  the  whole  country  in 
his  debt.  A  telling  cry  is  more  than  half  the  battle,  and  commonly  the  cry  tells 
just  in  proportion  to  the  distinctness  with  which  it  describes  the  object  sought. 
To  a  far  greater  extent  than  is  commonly  supposed,  the  endurance  of  our  national 
life  hinges  on  our  achievement  of  church  unity.  .  .  .  May  he  live  to  be  a 
bishop  in  the  United  Church  of  the  United  States." 


126  Viezvs  of  the   Quadrilateral. 

Lutheran  Church  will  probably  procure  the  Swedish  Episco- 
pate. The  Reformed  and  Presbyterian  Churches  may  be  more 
ripe  for  the  American  Episcopate  than  is  now  imagined. 
There  is  nothing  to  repel  them  in  consolidation,  whether  near 
or  far  off,  as  Dr.  Huntington  depicts  it  and  would  allure  them 
toward  it.  He  has  said  Nolo  episcopari  more  than  once,  but  in 
the  ideal  "United  Church  of  the  United  States  "  he  is  already 
Primate  by  acclamation. 

I  need  not  say  that  the  contribution  of  Dr.  Satterlee^  shares 
the  same  attractive  qualities.  His  appreciative  and  discrimi- 
nating analysis  of  the  argument  of  the  essay  gives  to  it  new 
force  and  clearness  which  its  author  had  not  perceived.  In 
particular,  I  would  emphasize,  in  his  own  language,  his  view 
of  organic  growth  as  a  method  of  unification  on  the  basis  of 
the  Lambeth  articles :  "  It  is  divine  and  not  human  ;  it  is 
natural  and  not  artificial ;  it  is  living  and  not  mechanical ;  it 
centralizes  itself  not  in  any  one  Christian  body  but  in  all  of 
them.  Though  men  may  not  create  it,  they  can  develop  it 
by  recognizing  and  yielding  themselves  up  to  this  force  of 
spiritual  gravitation." 

No  voice  could  be  more  welcome  in  this  Christian  circle 
than  one  from  the  Church  which  is,  in  a  sense,  the  mother 
of  us  all.     Dr.  Synnott,^  in  his  excellent  letter,  has  impres- 


1  The  Rev.  H.  Y.  Satterlee,  D.D.,  Calvary  Church,  New  York  :— 

"  The  four  Chicago-Lambeth  articles  present  an  ideal  toward  which  every 
Christian  body  can  work.  If  it  be  a  true  ideal  then  it  is  the  duty  of  each  to 
propagate  its  influence ;  if  it  be  false  in  any  respect  then  it  is  the  duty  of  each  to 
show  exactly  where  it  is  false  and  how  it  ought  to  be  modified,  for  to  even  the 
intelligent  Christian  observer  the  present  divided  state  of  Christendom  is  the 
crowning  evil  of  the  times." 

2  The  Rev.  Joseph  J.  Synnott,  D.D.  (Roman  Catholic),  Seton  Hall  College : — 
"The  present  movement,  defective  as  it  is  in  its  fundamental  conception,  may, 

we  hope,  be  turned  to  good.  It  recognizes  the  need  of  union  ;  it  admits  the 
absolute  necessity  of  organization  in  church  matters;  nay,  it  concedes  the  institu- 
tion of  the  Church  as  a  visible,  social,  organic  body ;  it  looks  upon  the  Episcopate 
as  the  only  means  of  achieving  unity.  It  is  on  the  right  road :  Let  it  go  a  step 
further,  and  it  will  see  in  the  Church  of  Rome  not  only  the  Historic  Episcopate, 
but  also  the  Historic  Primacy,  the  formal  element  and  bond  of  union  and  strength." 


Episcopal  Opiniojis.  127 

sively  set  forth  that  aspect  of  soHd  unity  presented  by  an 
episcopate  claiming  for  its  primate  a  succession  from  St.  Peter 
as  the  vicar  of  Christ.  The  early  Protestants  could  appre- 
ciate this  appeal  better  than  we  do  now.  Melanchthon  would 
have  been  content  to  remain  under  the  Papacy  had  the  lib- 
erty of  evangelical  preaching  been  allowed.  Calvin,  in  the 
most  pathetic  terms,  resented  the  charge  of  Cardinal  Sadolet 
that  the  Reformers  were  breaking  up  the  unity  of  the  Church. 
And  since  that  great  rupture  passed  into  history  a  more 
Christian  spirit  has  been  growing  in  spite  of  the  bitter  con- 
troversies which  it  engendered.  When  Pius  the  Ninth,  in 
1868,  by  an  encyclical  letter,  affectionately  invited  all  Protest- 
ants to  return  to  the  Roman  communion,  the  Presbyterian 
General  Assembly  returned  a  courteous  response,  maintain- 
ing that  they  were  not  out  of  the  communion  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  since  they  accepted  the  doctrinal  decisions  of  the 
first  six  CEcumenical  Councils,  especially  those  of  Nice, 
Ephesus,  Chalcedon,  and  Constantinople,  and  only  rejected 
certain  later  innovations.  At  the  present  moment  also  there 
is  among  intelligent  Protestants  an  increasing  respect  for  the 
consistent  conservatism  of  the  ancient  church  amid  the 
abounding  unbelief  and  license  of  the  times. 

As  to  the  question  before  us,  one  main  difficulty  is  that,  while 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  maintains  a  formal  unity  within  its 
own  pale,  it  does  not  exert  a  unifying  potency  throughout 
the  rest  of  the  Christian  world.  Until  it  has  made  peace  with 
the  oldest  church  in  Christendom,  the  Orthodox  Greek 
Church,  its  claim  to  catholic  unity  will  be  challenged ;  and 
while  the  newspapers  are  filled  with  reports  of  its  own  intes- 
tine conflicts  even  Protestant  dissensions  do  not  seem  so 
scandalous.  The  clever  picture  which  Dr.  Synnott  draws  of 
denominational  bishops,  like  so  many  trees,  plants,  and  shrubs 
tied  to  stakes  of  the  same  size  and  kind,  might  be  matched 
by  another  in  which  a  divided  episcopate  and  intelligent 
laity  would  appear  attached  to  the  Papacy  by  no  less  pre- 
carious ties.     Thoughtful   observers,  without  the  least  disre- 


128  Views  of  the   Quadrilateral. 

spect,  believe  that  in  this  democratic  country  the  Catholic 
Church  is  itself  undergoing  an  internal  reformation,  of  which 
it  is  not  yet  fully  conscious,  and  by  which  it  is  to  be  brougnt 
into  closer  agreement  with  a  like  reformation  which  Protest- 
ants have  already  achieved.  Should  such  hidden  grounds  of 
reunion  ever  appear  it  might  not  be  difficult  for  communions 
of  European  origin  to  recognize  a  certain  "  Historic  Prim- 
acy "  of  the  Roman  See  in  relation  to  a  truly  American 
Catholic  Church. 

The  movement  for  Church  Unity  has  been  rapid  and  full 
of  surprises.  The  ecclesiastical  situation  has  changed,  one 
might  almost  say,  from  month  to  month,  and  from  week  to 
week.  In  less  than  a  decade,  since  the  American  Bishops 
lifted  the  standard  of  unity  among  the  Christian  denomina- 
tions, there  has  been  a  growing  interest  in  the  question, 
which  is  not  confined  to  our  own  country,  but  extends  to  all 
the  English-speaking  races.  Nor  can  this  interest  be  regarded 
as  sensational  and  transient,  much  less  as  a  dream  of  vision- 
ary reformers  or  a  stock  theme  of  the  religious  newspapers. 
It  reveals  a  spontaneous  movement  of  the  whole  Christian 
body.  Thoughtful  observers  can  see  in  it  the  impulse  of 
great  historic  causes  and  reactionary  tendencies  which  have 
been  gathering  force  for  at  least  a  century,  and  which  are 
making  the  unification  of  the  American  churches  an  inevit- 
able and  chief  Christian  problem  of  cur  age  and  country. 

Let  the  evidences  of  progress  first  have  our  attention. 
Chief  among  such  evidences  should  be  placed  the  clearness 
with  which  church  unity  is  becoming  distinguished  from 
Christian  unity  or  from  the  spiritual  oneness  of  all  true 
Christians.  This  distinction  is  of  primary  importance.  Valu- 
able as  the  spiritual  unity  of  Christian  bodies  must  be  deemed, 
it  is  still  invisible,  distorted,  and  largely  sentimental  and 
inoperative ;  while  church  unity  would  be  visible,  organic, 
potent,  affording  in  its  ideal  fulfillment  the  only  perfect  ex- 
pression of  spiritual  unity.     Hitherto,  this  important  distinc- 


The  Ecclesiastical  Situation.  129 

tion  has  been  overlooked  by  those  who  did  not  appreciate 
church  unity;  and  even  those  who  theoretically  appreciated 
it  seemed  to  have  practically  adjourned  it  to  the  millennium, 
on  the  specious  plea  that  Christians  are  not  yet  good  enough 
to  be  united  in  one  catholic  church,  thus  making  an  excuse 
out  of  their  own  sin  or  trying  to  be  too  pious  for  the  situation. 
It  is  certain  that  church  unity  will  never  befall  us  as  a  sort  of 
blessed  accident,  or  miraculous  Pentecost,  without  any  effort 
on  our  part.  All  true  Christians  are  at  least  good  enough  to 
begin  the  work  of  church  unification.  A  beginning  must  be 
made  some  time  ;  and  such  a  beginning  the  recent  discussion 
has  actually  made,  by  calling  attention  to  the  duty  and  privi- 
lege, as  well  as  need,  of  combining  the  legitimate  denomina- 
tions on  a  purely  ecclesiastical  basis,  without  suppressing 
their  dogmatic  differences  and  liturgical  usages.  Not  merely 
individual  ministers,  but  several  Christian  bodies,  the  Congre- 
gational and  the  Presbyterian,  have  already  declared  them- 
selves in  favor  of  some  such  corporate  unity  or  church  unity 
as  the  goal  of  Christian  unity. 

It  is  a  further  evidence  of  progress,  consequent  upon  the 
advance  just  mentioned,  that  the  Quadrilateral  is  beginning 
to  be  appreciated  in  its  strictly  ecclesiastical  qualities,  as 
affording  the  bases  and  bonds  of  the  desired  church  unity. 
At  first,  neither  churchmen  nor  denominationalists  seemed 
clearly  to  understand  why  the  canon,  creeds,  sacraments, 
and  episcopate  should  be  named  as  the  only  ecclesiastical 
requisites.  By  the  one  party  it  was  thought  that  the  omission 
of  the  Prayer  Book,  Articles,  and  Anglican  Ordinal  would 
imperil  the  integrity  of  the  Church  ;  and  by  the  other  party, 
that  the  acceptance  of  the  Historic  Episcopate  would  subvert 
the  doctrine  and  polity  of  all  the  non-episcopal  denomina- 
tions. Both  failed  to  see  that  the  four  articles  simply  secure 
to  them  what  they  both  need  without  the  least  sacrifice  of 
churchly  feeling  or  denominational  consistency,  viz.,  a  com- 
mon rule  of  faith,  a  catholic  creed,  valid  sacraments,  and  a 
9 


130  Views  of  the   Quadrilateral. 

legitimate  ministry.  If  a  Christian  body  has  all  these  four 
essentials,  it  is  in  good  church  standing;  if  it  lacks  any  of 
them,  its  church  claims  are  more  or  less  defective.  And  the 
recent  discussion  has  put  to  test  these  criteria.  By  leading  to 
a  comparison  of  the  various  denominational  standards  with 
the  Quadrilateral,  it  has  revealed  their  respective  degrees  of 
churchliness,  and  has  shown  that  their  church  unification 
must  be  approached  along  the  lines  which  it  has  projected. 
As  yet,  indeed,  only  a  few  advanced  thinkers  have  discussed 
it  in  this  light;  but  at  least  one  large  body,  the  Presbyterian 
Church,  has  formally  approved  the  first  three  of  the  articles 
of  church  unity,  and  has  been  engaged  in  friendly  conference 
with  the  Episcopal  commissioners  as  to  the  fourth  article.^ 

Still  another  step  in  advance  is  the  discovery  of  the  catho- 
lic spirit  and  unifying  value  of  the  Quadrilateral.  For  along 
time,  non-episcopal  divines  viewed  it  askance,  as  a  mere  stroke 
of  denominational  propagandism,  and  some  episcopal  divines 
treated  it  as  a  dubious  measure  of  church  aggrandizement. 
Neither  side  seemed  to  perceive  that  the  first  three  articles 
were  already  possessed  by  other  reformed  churches  besides 
the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  and  that  the  fourth  article 
was  not  the  exclusive  property  of  that  church,  since  the  Mora- 
vian or  Swedish  or  old  Catholic  Episcopate  is  theoretically  as 
available  as  the  Anglo-American  Episcopate  for  the  purpose 
of  church  unity,  as  well  as  for  any  other  spiritual  benefit  to 
be  conveyed.  Both  parties,  in  fact,  were  infusing  into  the 
four  tenets  their  own  denominational  significance  with  more 
or  less  interested  motives.  But  the  recent  discussion  has 
changed  the  point  of  view.  It  has  lifted  the  Quadrilateral 
out  of  these  narrow  misapprehensions,  and  planted  it  where 
it  belongs,  in  the  midst  of  the  denominations,  as  the  rallying 
standard  of  a  united  church.  And  although  but  few  recruits 
have  openly  espoused  it,  yet  it  has  at  least  been  favorably 

^  Report  of  Assembly's  Special  Committee  on  Church  Unity,  1893. 


Favorable  Signs.  131 

discussed   in  a  symposium  of  ministers  representing  all  the 
leading  denominations,  both  Catholic  and  Protestant.^ 

The  advantage  of  this  new  departure  and  approach  to 
church  unity  may  not  appear  at  once  to  all  minds.  It  may 
even  cost  some  Protestant  Episcopal  churchmen  an  effort  to 
admit  that  the  Quadrilateral  is  not  bounded  by  the  four  sides 
of  their  own  denomination ;  that  no  single  denomination  can 
now  claim  to  be  the  national  church,  not  even  the  Roman, 
which  is  the  largest  catholic  Church  in  the  country  ;  and  that 
other  Protestant  denominations  may  yet  acquire  full  and  unim- 
peachable church  standing.  The  great  Lutheran  Church,  for 
example,  has  the  historic  episcopate  of  Northern  Europe 
within  reach,  and  is  even  now  considering  the  advantage  of 
acquiring  it.^  Equipped  with  that  advantage,  it  might  offer 
to  some  other  churchmen  a  prestige  older  than  the  Reformed 
Church  of  England,  a  confession  less  Calvinistic  than  the 
Thirty-nine  Articles,  and  a  Liturgy  more  Tractarian  than  the 
Prayer  Book.  I  have  no  fear  of  being  here  misunderstood. 
Personally,  as  I  have  elsewhere  stated,  I  might  gladly  hope 
that  the  chief  church  of  our  English  civilization  should  dis- 
solve, recast,  and  absorb  all  the  other  one  hundred  and  forty 
denominations  of  continental  as  well  as  British  origin.  Al- 
ready it  is  nobly  leading  them  toward  unity,  and  in  the 
church  of  the  future  may  give  more  than  it  will  receive.  But 
there  is  a  right  and  a  wrong  way  of  putting  things.  There 
is  an  imperial  churchmanship  which  would  embrace  all 
communions  within  one  united  church  of  the  United  States  ; 
and  there  is  another  sort  which  would  pursue  catholicity 
only  by  the  methods  of  a  denominational  policy.  Christian 
bodies,  in  their  intercourse,  are  keenly  sensitive  to  anything 
that  looks  like  propagandism  and  proselytism.     They  will 

1  The  Question  of  Unity.  Many  Voices  Concerning  Dr.  Shields'  Book, 
"  The  Historic  Episcopate,"  and  His  Response  to  the  Many  Voices.  Chris. 
Lit.  Pub.  Society. 

2  The  Episcopate  for  the  Lutheran  Church  in  America.  Second  edition.  By 
the  Rev.  J.  Kohler,  D.  D. 


132  Views  of  the   Quadrilateral. 

not  be  attracted  to  the  exclusive  ground  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church,  as  a  basis  of  unity  ;  but  they  might  be 
attracted  to  the  broader,  common  ground  of  an  American 
catholic  Church.  Such  a  common  ground  is  afforded  them 
in  the  Quadrilateral,  and  by  opening  it  to  the  public  view  as 
an  undenominational  platform,  the  late  discussion  has  brought 
a  distinct  gain  to  the  logic  and  the  policy  of  the  movement 
for  church  unity. 

This  survey  would  not  be  complete  without  including  two 
other  features  of  the  situation  which  are  not  so  favorable. 
They  should  be  frankly  stated  and  carefully  considered. 
One  of  them  is  the  recent  symposium  of  bishops  and  minis- 
ters, in  a  New  York  journal.^  It  must  be  granted  that  this 
discussion  has  wounded  some  friends  of  church  unity  and 
touched  a  clerical  sensitiveness  more  to  be  respected  than 
resented.  But  it  must  also  be  granted  that  these  untoward 
effects  are  due  not  so  much  to  the  bishops  as  to  their  critics  ; 
that  they  have  been  greatly  aggravated  by  the  denominational 
papers ;  and  that  they  may  soon  pass  away.  At  best,  the 
question  of  pulpit  exchange  is  a  side  issue  of  trivial  interest ; 
one  which  ought  not  to  be  raised  until  the  more  important 
points  of  the  Quadrilateral  have  been  settled,  and  one  which 
could  not  be  raised  at  all  if  they  are  wisely  settled.  Least 
of  all  should  it  have  been  raised  while  they  were  under  con- 
sideration. Its  interjection  into  the  pending  negotiation 
between  the  Episcopal  and  Presbyterian  communions  has  had 
all  the  effect  of  an  apple  of  discord  thrown  by  an  unfriendly 
hand.  Moreover,  the  question  itself,  as  proposed  in  the 
symposium,  is  simply  preposterous.  Does  anybody  favor 
indiscriminate  pulpit  exchanges  ?  Could  the  bishops  have 
given  any  other  direct  answer?  Half  the  critics  would  them- 
selves have  given  the  same  answer  as  that  by  which  they 
were    offended.     Presbyteries,  at   least,  are    no   more    ready 

1  "  A  Barrier  to  Church  Unity:  Can  it  be  Removed?  "  N.  Y.  Independent, 
March  8,  1S94. 


Unfavorable  Signs.  133 

than  bishops  to  admit  heretical  teachers  and  unauthorized 
evangelists  to  preach  and  administer  the  sacraments,  whatever 
individual  pastors  and  rectors  may  sometimes  do.  The  line 
of  authority,  regularity  and  decorum  must  be  drawn  some- 
where. As  a  matter  of  fact,  Congregationalists  draw  it  at  one 
point ;  Presbyterians  at  another ;  and  the  bishops  have  shown 
where  Episcopalians  draw  it.  Instead  of  erecting  "a  barrier 
to  church  unity,"  they  have  simply  indicated  a  boundary  of 
church  unity  ;  and,  as  marked  out  by  the  Quadrilateral,  it 
will  be  found  to  be  a  boundary  ample  enough  to  include 
Congregationalists  and  Presbyterians,  as  well  as  Episcopalians, 
within  the  fold  of  a  united  church. 

The  other  unfavorable  sign  in  the  ecclesiastical  horizon  is 
the  appearance  of  rival  schemes  of  mere  vague  Christian  unity, 
which  if  not  designed  to  take  the  place  of  church  unity,  are 
suited  to  raise  a  mist  of  confusion  and  perplexity  around  it. 
Of  these  the  most  remarkable  is  the  so-called  Quadrilateral 
of  the  Congregational  Association  of  New  Jersey.  If  this 
declaration  had  proceeded  from  any  other  denominational 
source,  Baptist,  Methodist,  Presbyterian,  or  Episcopalian,  I 
would  still  say  of  it  that  it  seems  to  me  utterly  wanting  in 
historic  Christianity,  ecclesiastical  quality  and  organic  force. 
Instead  of  the  four  church  tenets  of  canon,  creed,  sacrament, 
and  ministry,  it  offers  four  misty  propositions  which  may 
mean  almost  anything  or  nothing,  and  which  could  not  hold 
together  any  two  churches  or  denominations  for  a  single  hour. 
Its  noble  professions  of  chanty  and  fraternity  toward  other 
denominations  are  in  themselves  praiseworthy,  and  may  in- 
crease the  spirit  of  Christian  unity;  but  on  their  present 
unstable  basis  they  cannot  promote  church  unity,  except  in 
an  indirect  and  remote  way.  Indeed,  it  does  not  pretend  to 
be  a  scheme  of  church  unity.  The  only  scheme  deserving 
to  be  so  called  is  that  which  has  emanated  from  Chicago  and 
Lambeth.  No  other  is  in  the  field.  No  other  has  even  been 
suggested.  And  notwithstanding  all  the  misapprehension 
and  perversion   to   which   it  has  been   exposed,   it   remains 


1 34  Views  of  the   Quadrilateral. 

unshaken  and  unimpaired,  and  in  the  future  seems  likely  to 
become  a  standard  by  which  to  measure  and  guide  the  various 
Christian  denominations  in  their  educational  advancement 
toward  a  truly  American  Catholic  Church. 

The  present  situation  suggests  two  practical  reflections. 
The  first  is,  that  the  denominational  controversies  of  the 
hour  are  not  irreconcilable  with  catholic  unity.  The  very 
same  differences  in  respect  to  the  Scriptures,  the  creeds,  the 
sacraments  and  the  episcopate  exist  among  churchmen,  which 
have  been  developed  among  denominationalists.  There  is 
not  an  opinion  on  these  points  advanced  by  the  various  non- 
episcopal  divines  who  are  discussing  them  in  denominational 
journals,  which  has  not  been  also  avowed  by  as  many  clergy- 
men now  in  Holy  Orders  and  of  unquestioned  standing.  This 
does  not  mean  that  Church  Unity  is  "  an  iridescent  dream." 
It  means  simply  that  all  American  churchmen,  in  an  ideal 
Catholic  Church,  might  still  differ  among  themselves  as  other 
Christians  do  now. 

The  other  reflection  is,  that  the  differences  between  denomi- 
nationalists and  churchmen  are  largely  confined  to  clergymen 
or  ministers,  especially  those  already  committed  as  leaders. 
Learned  rectors  and  eloquent  pastors,  in  one  symposium  after 
another,  have  so  infused  their  own  various  partisan  meanings 
into  the  four  terms  of  unity,  that  now  the  terms  themselves 
are  obscured  and  lost  from  view.  But  the  great  Christian 
heart  of  the  people  still  beats  true  to  them.  The  Holy 
Scriptures  are  still  the  basis  of  all  Christian  denominations: 
the  Apostles*  and  Nicene  Creeds  still  express  their  essential 
faith ;  the  two  sacraments  are  still  ministered  among  them 
with  unfailing  use  of  Christ's  words  of  institution ;  and  the 
Historic  Episcopate  is  still  adaptable  to  the  Episcopalians, 
Presbyterians  and  Congregationalists  beyond,  as  well  as 
within,  its  pale.  In  a  word,  the  Christian  masses  despite 
their  wrangling  leaders,  are  still  in  heart  and  hope  one 
American  Catholic  Church. 


V. 


THE   QUADRILATERAL  STANDARD 
AMONG  THE  DENOMINATIONS. 


V. 

THE  QUADRILATERAL  STANDARD  AMONG  THE 
DENOMINA  TIONS. 

Our  review  of  the  ecclesiastical  situation  has  led  us  to  the 
general  conclusion  that  the  Quadrilateral  is  likely  to  become 
a  standard  by  which  to  measure  and  guide  the  various  Chris- 
tian denominations  in  their  educational  progress  toward  an 
American  Catholic  Church.  It  affords  the  only  favorable 
outlook  for  Church  Unity.  If  we  take  our  position  in  any 
existing  church,  hoping  to  see  it  absorb  into  itself  all  the 
other  hundred  and  fifty  denominations,  everything  like 
Church  Unity  will  seem  as  far  off  and  nebulous  as  the  millen- 
nium. But  if  we  take  our  position  in  the  midst  of  the  denom- 
inations, hoping  to  rally  them  around  the  Quadrilateral  as  an 
undenominational  standard,  they  will  appear  in  various  stages 
of  unification  as  they  severally  approximate  the  requirements 
of  that  standard.     Let  us  try  this  latter  point  of  view. 

It  will  help  the  survey  to  arrange  the  chief  Christian  de- 
nominations in  fancy  on  either  side  of  the  standard,  according 
as  they  possess  all  the  four  Lambeth  articles  or  only  one  or 
two  of  them.  By  such  an  arrangement  the  right  wing  will 
include  the  great  historic  Churches,  the  Greek,  the  Latin,  the 
Anglican,  the  Scandinavian,  which  need  more  or  less  church 
reformation  before  they  can  be  thoroughly  reunited  ;  while 
the  left  wing  will  embrace  those  reformed  churches  and  de- 
nominations which  largely  require  a  work  of  church  restora- 
tion in  order  to  be  unified  on  a  Church  basis.  Dismissing  the 
former  for  the  present,  we  confine  our  view  to  the  Protestant 
bodies  in  our  country  which  have  yet  to  be  brought  back  into 
full  connection  and  harmony  with  historic  Christianity. 

These  bodies  will  naturally  fall  into  three  groups,  according 

137 


138  The   Qitadr Hater al  Stand ca-d. 

to  their  ecclesiastial  structure  :  the  congregational,  the  pres- 
byterial,  and  the  episcopal.  As  to  each  of  them,  a  general 
remark  may  here  be  in  place.  The  congregational  polity,  so 
long  as  it  asserts  the  absolute  independence  of  the  local  church, 
could  not,  of  course,  come  within  the  scope  of  the  Lambeth 
articles,  since  it  would  accept  neither  canon,  nor  creed,  nor 
ritual,  nor  ministry  as  imposed  by  any  external  church  author- 
ity. It  could  only  enter  a  loose  confederation  of  churches, 
somewhat  like  our  former  union  of  states,  with  reserved  rights 
of  secession  and  self-control.  But  a  Congregationalism  which 
liberally  adds  the  principle  of  church  fellowship  to  that  of 
autonomy  might  adopt  the  Quadrilateral  as  embracing  only 
the  common  duties  and  interests  of  all  Christian  churches, 
without  interfering  with  their  interior  self-government.  In 
like  manner  the  presbyterial  polity,  if  held  to  be  inconsistent 
with  every  form  of  episcopacy,  could  only  adopt  the  first 
three  Lambeth  articles,  and  maintain  the  historic  presbyterate 
in  place  of  the  fourth  article.  But  a  presbyterianism  which 
consistently  applies  its  doctrine  of  presbyterial  oversight,  as 
well  as  of  Church  Unity,  might  find  its  own  complement  in  the 
fourth  article  and  at  the  same  time  recover  all  the  elements  of 
catholicity.  The  episcopal  polity,  also,  cannot  come  up  to 
the  full  measure  of  the  standard,  if  wanting  in  any  of  the 
first  three  articles  or  holding  the  fourth  in  a  partisan  or  sec- 
tarian sense.  Only  that  episcopalianism  which  will  tolerate 
ritualists  as  well  as  evangelists  and  evangelists  as  well  as  ritu- 
alists, can  deal  with  the  problem  of  Church  Unity. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  three  polities  vary  somewhat  in 
their  capacity  or  readiness  for  unification,  each  having  its  own 
special  difficulty  or  facility.  Congregationalism,  though  want- 
ing in  all  four  articles,  would  leave  each  congregation  free  to 
act  for  itself  in  reference  to  them.  Presbyterianism,  though 
binding  each  congregation  in  a  compact  organization,  would 
only  need  to  have  that  organization  completed  in  the  fourth 
article.  And  Episcopalianism,  though  in  some  of  its  forms 
needing  legitimation  or  completion,  in  one  of  its  forms  already 


Congregational  Denominations.  139 

offers  the  model  and  germ  of  a  complete  Church  Unity.  At 
the  same  time,  it  will  be  found  that  these  inherent  difficulties 
or  facilities  are  greatly  complicated  with  others  more  adven- 
titious and  extraneous,  such  as  the  prejudices,  dogmatic, 
national  and  social,  which  have  been  acquired  in  this  country. 
Congregationalism  is  Unitarian  and  Baptist  as  well  as  Ortho- 
dox in  doctrine.  Presbyterianism  is  German,  Dutch,  French 
and  English  as  well  as  Scotch  in  origin.  And  Episcopalian- 
ism  is  evangelistical  as  well  as  liturgical  in  worship.  All  this 
will  more  strikingly  appear  as  we  proceed  to  compare  the 
leading  denominations  in  the  order  of  their  approach  toward 
the  Quadrilateral,  and  toward  that  denomination  which  most 
fully  illustrates  it,  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church. 

Congregational  Denominations. 

At  the  extreme  left  of  the  standard  are  the  Unitarian 
Congregationalists  who  would  probably  now  repudiate  it,  if 
made  binding  in  any  such  sense  as  would  preclude  their 
own  views  of  canon,  creed,  sacrament  and  ministry.  The 
only  hope  is  that,  like  other  denominations,  they  have 
reached  an  extreme  from  which  there  may  yet  be  some 
conservative  recoil  toward  a  more  normal  type  of  Chris- 
tianity. This  hope  is  favored  by  their  English  blood,  their 
Puritan  training,  their  liturgical  culture  and  their  churchly 
affinities.  It  is  even  rendered  plausible  by  the  large  agree- 
ment between  them  and  the  so-called  broad  Churchmen  of 
Old  and  New  England.  We  have  had  object-lessons,  not  in 
King's  chapel  only,  but  in  the  Church  Congress,  if  not  in  the 
episcopate.  In  the  event  of  such  a  reaction  our  Unitarian 
brethren  would  be  in  a  position  to  draw  after  them  certain 
religious  bodies  still  less  ecclesiastical  or  Christian  than 
themselves,  such  as  the  Friends,  the  Jews  and  other  Theists, 
who  as  yet  are  quite  beyond  the  scope  of  the  Quadrilateral. 
Indeed,  from  this  point  of  view,  the  Parliament  of  Religions 
and  the  Brotherhood  of  Christian  Unity,  in  which  Unitarians 
have  taken  an  active  part,  might  be  reckoned  as  unconscious 
first  steps  toward  the  distant  goal  of  Church  Unity. 


140  The   Quadrilateral  Standard. 

In  the  next  position  are  the  Orthodox  Congregationalists, 
who,  while  much  nearer  to  the  standard,  have  been  held 
back  from  it  through  long  centuries  of  separation,  insulation 
and  consequent  narrowness.  What  was,  at  first,  a  calamity 
in  the  old  world  and  then  a  necessity  in  this  new  world  has 
been  perpetuated  as  a  normal  condition,  even  a  permanent 
form  of  polity;  and  although  enjoying  to  the  full  all  and 
more  than  all  the  religious  freedom  for  which  their  fore- 
fathers contended,  they  seem  to  have  inherited  a  morbid 
terror  of  ecclesiasticism,  which  is  now  their  chief  obstacle  to 
unity.  Over  against  this  obstacle,  however,  must  be  placed 
not  only  their  Puritan  breeding,  their  broad  scholarship  and 
their  growing  historic  sense  and  catholic  spirit,  but  also 
their  practical  adherence  to  the  canon,  their  substantial 
agreement  with  the  creeds,  their  formal  observance  of  the 
sacraments  and  their  ready  susceptibility  to  the  episcopate 
without  loss  of  denominational  pride.  These  germs  of 
Church  life  among  them  only  await  development.  In  fact, 
they  have  already  been  largely  developed  on  their  own  soil. 
It  has  been  said  that  a  New  England  diocese  is  Congrega- 
tionalism tinctured  with  episcopacy.  The  ease  with  which 
any  Congregationalist  society,  if  so  minded,  could  pass  into 
such  a  diocese,  would  be  impossible  for  a  Presbyterian  parish  ; 
and  it  is  quite  conceivable  that  some  absorption  or  consoli- 
dation, on  the  terms  of  the  Quadrilateral,  like  that  which  Dr. 
Huntington  advocates,  might  become  spontaneous  and  general 
without  agitating  the  Congregational  body  at  large.  But  it 
would  be  unwise  to  place  among  the  signs  of  such  a  move- 
ment the  so-called  Quadrilateral  of  the  New  Jersey  Congre- 
gationalists, since  it  is  covertly  based  upon  vague  anti-Church 
principles.^  That  manifesto  can  only  be  viewed  as  a  prepara- 
tory expression  of  Christian  fellowship  or  as  a  crude  sugges- 

^  "  A  Declaration  by  the  Congregational  Association  of  New  Jersey."  It  pro- 
poses, "  the  Bible  for  creed  ;  Discipleship  of  Christ  for  rule  of  life  ;  the  Church 
for  instrument  of  service ;  and  liberty  of  conscience  in  the  interpretation  of  the 
Bible  and  administration  of  the  Church." — The  New  York  Indepetident ,  June  28, 
1S94. 


Con(rreo^atio7ial  Denominations.  141 


tion  which,  by  its  failure,  may  make  clearer  the  need  of  true 
Church  Unity. 

In  the  same  group  are  the  Baptist  Congregationalists,  dif- 
fering by  a  stricter  independency,  but  sharing  some  of  the 
same  churchward  tendencies.  Their  chief  difficulty  lies  in  a 
view  of  the  third  article,  which  isolates  them  from  the  rest  of 
Christendom,  and  seems  to  build  around  them  a  barrier  to 
anything  like  unity.  They  might  accept  the  canon,  the 
creed,  and  even  the  episcopate,  but  they  could  not  commune 
with  any  but  immersed  believers.  On  the  other  hand,  it 
cannot  be  said  that  this  strict  adherence  to  a  divine  rite  is  in 
itself  without  ecclesiastical  value  as  a  potential  germ  of 
church  life.  Nor  might  it  be  quite  impossible  for  them  to 
develop  it  in  a  larger  church  system  on  their  own  principle 
of  local  autonomy.  The  Prayer  Book  not  only  allows  immer- 
sion as  well  as  sprinkling,  but  offers  a  form  of  "  Baptism  to 
such  as  are  of  riper  years  and  able  to  answer  for  themselves;" 
and  the  sight  of  Baptist  and  Paedo-Baptist  congregations 
under  the  same  episcopate  would  be  scarcely  any  more 
incongruous  than  that  of  certain  other  ritualistic  and  anti- 
ritualistic  parishes.  What  is  asked  of  our  Baptist  brethren 
is  not  concession,  but  tolerance  and  fellowship.  And  such  a 
spirit  is  growing  among  them.  The  expressions  of  Christian 
fraternity  which  come  from  them  are  very  encouraging  in  view 
of  the  acknowledged  difficulties  of  their  position ;  and  a  few 
efforts  to  unite  among  themselves  such  as  those  of  the 
♦'  Christian  "  and  "  Free  Baptists  "  ^  and  Disciples  of  Christ^ 
on  a  Bible  basis,  though  without  historic  creed  or  ministry, 
may  be  viewed  as  first  steps  toward  some  more  organic 
unity. 

The  whole  Congregational  group  of  denominations,  it  will 
be  seen,  is  as  yet  in  the  preparatory  stage  of  church  restora- 
tion, being    largely  wanting    in    ecclesiastical    elements    and 

1  Quadrennial  Convention,  Haverhill,  Mass.,  Oct.  15. 

2  General  Convention  of  Disciples  of  Ctirist,  at  Richmond,  Va.,  Oct.  25. 


142  The   Qtiadrilateral  Sta7idard. 

hindered  by  anti-ecclesiastical  prejudices.  But  its  most  intel- 
ligent and  influential  bodies  are  already  turning  churchward. 
The  International  Council  of  1891  "  unanimously  expressed 
a  hope  for  the  federation  of  Christian  bodies,"  ^  and  the  last 
National  Council  "  recommended  the  affiliation  of  other  Con- 
gregational churches  upon  the  basis  of  the  common  evangeli- 
cal faith  and  a  substantial  Congregational  polity."  ^  Such  a 
denominational  unity,  with  the  growth  of  the  church  spirit, 
may  hereafter  become  ready  for  church  unity. 

Presbyterial  Denominations. 
As  we  pass  to  the  presbyterial  group,  we  shall  find  that  the 
preparatory  work  is  not  so  much  one  of  church  restoration  as 
of  church  completion,  the  development  and  fulfillment  of 
already  existing  ecclesiastical  elements.  First  in  this  group, 
in  close  alliance  with  the  Congregationalists,  but  much  nearer 
to  the  standard  of  the  Quadrilateral,  are  the  Calvinistic  Pres- 
byterians, adhering  to  the  Westminster  Confession.  The 
practical  impediments  among  them  to  unity  are  their  inflexi- 
ble Scotch  and  Scotch-Irish  temperament,  their  polemic 
spirit,  their  inherited  dread  of  liturgical  worship,  and  their 
embittered  recollections  of  a  persecuting  prelacy  in  the  old 
world.  Many  of  them  are  still  echoing  the  war-cries  of  the 
Covenant,  while  themselves  extemporizing  new  episcopates, 
making  Prayer  Books  and  building  cathedral-like  houses  of 
worship.  But,  offsetting  such  impediments,  there  is  a  strong 
infusion  of  English  and  Huguenot  blood  in  their  Covenanter 
stock,  a  growing  tolerance  in  their  virile  orthodoxy,  and  a 
reviving  catholicity  in  their  intense  ecclesiasticism.  More- 
over, their  own  standards  already  maintain  at  least  three  of 
the  Lambeth  articles.  Their  Confession  formally  defines  the 
canonical  books  of  Scripture.  Their  Directory  prescribes  the 
Apostles'  Creed  and  the  valid  conditions  of  the  two  sacra- 
ments.    And  their  Form  of  Government  recognizes  the  offices 

^  The  Cong7'egationalist ,  Oct.  25. 


Presbyle7'ial  Deiiominatioiis.  143 

of  bishop,  presbyter  and  deacon  as  Scriptural  and  divine. 
These  standards,  too,  have  hidden  historicaffinities  with  those 
of  the  EngHsh  Church  and  its  American  scion.  The  Articles 
of  Religion  were  but  the  original  skeleton  of  the  Westminster 
Confession.  The  Ordinal  does  not  claim  a  higher  doctrine 
of  the  apostolic  ministry  than  was  lodged  in  the  Scottish 
presbyterate.  The  Daily  and  Communion  Offices  are  largely 
Calvinistic  in  purport  and  structure,  as  well  as  in  traceable 
origin.  In  a  word,  the  entire  Prayer-book,  as  amended  by 
the  Presbyterian  divines  of  1661,  is  so  much  like  the  present 
book  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  that,  if  now  living, 
they  would  be  more  at  home  in  that  church  than  in  any  other 
American  communion.  It  is  true  that  these  historic  bonds 
are  obscured  or  ignored  and  forgotten,  but  they  are  none  the 
less  enduring  and  vital.  The  plain  fact  is,  that  the  Presby- 
terian General  Assembly  is  the  only  Christian  body  that  has 
met  the  Episcopal  commissioners  in  a  churchly  spirit;  and 
the  untoward  pause  to  which  they  have  come  may  simply 
mean  that  each  has  something  to  give  as  well  as  to  receive  in 
any  negotiation  or  alliance. 

In  the  same  Calvinistic  group,  but  a  little  nearer  to  the 
standard,  are  the  Reformed  Presbyterians,  Dutch  and  German, 
adhering  to  the  Confession  of  Dort  and  the  Heidelberg  cate- 
chism. They  seem  to  be  hindered  from  unity  largely  by  their 
conservative  habit,  their  denominational  pride,  and  their  long 
vested  property  rights  and  interests.  Hitherto  they  have  de- 
clined proposed  alliances  with  Presbyterian  churches  which 
have  adopted  their  own  Heidelberg  symbol;  and  the  Dutch 
and  German  wings  of  the  denomination  have  not  yet  been 
able  even  to  federate,  although  their  standards  are  identical. 
At  the  same  time — some  counteracting  influences  have  arisen 
from  their  commingling  with  other  races,  creeds,  and  cultures. 
Their  Calvinism,  though  of  the  highest  type,  is  mild  and 
pacific.  They  possess  the  first  three  Lambeth  articles  more 
perfectly  than  other  Presbyterians,  with  the  same  structural 
aptitude  for  the  fourth  article.     Their  liturgy  also  connects 


144  ^^^^   Quaclj'ilateral  Standard. 

them  aesthetically  as  well  as  historically  with  the  Prayer-book. 
And  it  is  not  unlikely  that  strong  ancestral  and  social  ties  are 
drawing  them  toward  the  Episcopal  Church  in  New  York 
rather  than  toward  bodies  which  are  really  more  congruous 
with  them  in  doctrine  and  polity.  It  will  be  remembered  that 
the  House  of  Nassau  gave  freedom  to  the  Kirk  of  Scotland, 
but  cast  its  lot  in  the  Church  of  England. 

Nearest  in  the  Presbyterial  group  to  the  standard,  are  the 
Lutherans,  adhering  to  the  Augsburg  Confession.  As  this 
great  cluster  of  churches  becomes  more  Americanized,  it  may 
take  a  leading  part  in  the  problem  of  Church  Unity.  Its 
genial  type  of  piety,  its  ritualistic  tendencies,  its  growing  cul- 
ture and  direct  connection  with  German  erudition  will  be 
reckoned  by  many  as  promising  features.  In  some  respects 
it  is  the  most  conservative  Church  of  the  Reformation.  Its 
standards  set  forth  most  fully  the  first  three  Lambeth  articles, 
and  it  already  has  the  historic  episcopate  in  abeyance  or  with- 
in reach.  The  Swedish^  succession  is  less  questioned  than 
the  Anglican ;  and  if  it  has  not  always  claimed  apostolicity 
dogmatically,  yet  it  has  not  taken  polemic  ground  against  it, 
like  the  Reformed  Episcopalians  in  this  country.  Its  valid- 
ity is  at  least  a  puzzle  to  the  canonists.  The  Lutheran  ritual 
also  has  liturgical  affinities  with  the  English  and  American 
Prayer-book.  The  offices  of  Baptism,  Matrimony,  and  Burial 
are  largely  indebted  to  the  formularies  of  Melanchthon  and 
Bucer,  while  the  Evangelical  Mass  is  not  only  higher  in  doc- 
trine but  purer  in  structure  than  the  Communion  Office,  which 
has  certain  Calvinistic  accretions  more  popular  than  artistic 
in  their  aim.  The  church  of  the  saintly  Muhlenberg  is  begin- 
ning to  feel  the  general  impulse,  and  has  met  the  Chicago 
Declaration  in  a  thoroughly  appreciative  spirit.     Indeed,  the 


1  "  If  anything  outside  the  domain  of  pure  mathematics  maj'  be  said  to  be 
capable  of  demonstration,  Dr.  Nicholson  [of  Leamington,  England,]  has 
demonstrated  the  reality  of  the  Swedish  Succession."  Presiding  Bishop 
Williams,  of  Connecticut,  as  quoted  by  Rev.  J.  B.  Remensnyder,  D.  D. 


Episcopal  Dcnoininations.  145 

movement  of  its  leading  divines  for  recovering  its  lost  episco- 
pate is  a  distinct  ecclesiastical  advance  toward  unity. 

While  the  various  presbyterial  denominations  are  thus  found 
to  be  in  different  stages  of  nearness  to  full  church  standing, 
they  are  also  moving  together  in  a  mass  toward  the  same 
result.  The  great  Pan-Presbyterian  councils  in  Europe  and 
America  are  born  of  the  Presbyterian  instinct  for  "  one  Cath- 
olic, visible  church;"  and  the  last  General  Assembly  has 
formally  proposed  for  adoption  apian  of  federation,  to  include 
at  least  seven  presbyterial  denominations  or  reformed 
churches  under  one  "  Federal  Council"  or  "  Ecclesiastical 
Assembly,  for  the  glory  of  God  and  the  greater  unity  and 
advancement  of  the  church."  ^  Such  a  Presbyterian  church 
unity,  involving  ecclesiastical  elements  and  animated  with  an 
ecclesiastical  spirit,  would  only  need  to  acquire  the  historic 
episcopate  as  the  next  and  last  step  to  Catholic  unity. 

Episcopal  Denominations. 

When  we  come  to  the  episcopal  group,  the  outlook  is  more 
confused  and  perplexing,  for  the  reason  that  the  work  to  be 
done  is  that  of  legitimating  ecclesiastical  elements  which  lack 
mere  form  rather  than  substance.  The  Methodist  Episco- 
palians, for  example,  have  substantially  the  first  three  Lam- 
beth articles,  with  a  new  episcopacy  developed  out  of  the 
Anglican  presbyterate.  Their  inherited  dislike  of  formalism, 
their  evangelistic  fervor,  their  want  of  churchly  taste,  and 
their  immense  denominational  spirit  hold  them  back  from  the 
Quadrilateral  standard  with  a  recoil  which  is  not  yet  spent. 
Nevertheless,  historic  causes,  though  hidden,  are  potent, 
Methodism  at  first  was  an  Oxford  movement,  no  less  than 
Tractarianism ;  and  it  may  yet  react  from  its  extremes. 
Many  of  the  causes  which  once  justified  its  rise  in  England 
scarcely  remain  in  this  country,  and  the  need  of  it  as  a  pio- 
neer denomination  decreases  with  the  spread  of  civilization 

1  Minutes  of  General  Assembly,  1894. 
10 


146  The    Qitadialateral  Standard. 

and  the  growth  of  Christian  culture.  Some  ecclesiastical 
influences  are  already  permeating  it  in  the  large  cities.  The 
time  may  come  when  such  dormant  germs  as  the  Wesleyan 
Prayer  Book  and  Articles  shall  be  evoked  into  life,  and 
Methodist  Episcopacy  return  into  connection  with  historic 
Christianity. 

The  Reformed  Episcopalians  are  a  somewhat  similar  off- 
shoot from  the  Anglo-American  episcopate.  They  have  at- 
tempted to  erect  that  episcopate  upon  partisan,  if  not  sectarian 
ground,  in  the  interest  of  one-sided  views  of  the  ministry  and 
sacraments.  Their  dogmatic  opposition  to  apostolical  succes- 
sion and  baptismal  regeneration  may  promote  a  pure  type  of 
evangelical  piety  among  themselves  and  bring  them  into 
sympathy  with  other  Protestant  denominations ;  but  it  neces- 
sarily puts  them  in  a  polemic  attitude  toward  Catholic  unity. 
The  next  bad  thing  that  could  happen  would  be  another 
seceding  episcopate  in  pronounced  sympathy  with  Roman 
error  and  with  a  hostile  front  toward  all  the  reformed 
churches.  And  after  that  the  very  worst  thing  that  could 
happen  would  be  some  authoritative  definition  in  the  interest 
of  either  of  these  Church  parties.  That  would  rend  the  his- 
toric episcopate  itself  asunder,  and  end  the  dream  of  Church 
Unity  for  our  time.  No  General  Convention  or  Lambeth 
Conference  is  likely  to  undo  its  work  in  this  manner. 

The  Protestant  Episcopalians  alone  in  this  group  fulfill  the 
standard.  Their  Prayer-Book  and  Articles  prescribe  the 
canon,  creeds,  and  sacraments,  while  their  Ordinal  enjoins  the 
historic  episcopate.  In  the  movement  toward  unity,  they  are 
still  somewhat  impeded  by  their  early  British  antecedents, 
their  elaborate  liturgy,  their  fashionable  associations,  and 
some  occasional  infelicity  in  their  Church  claims.  Although, 
during  the  first  two  hundred  years  of  their  nominal  existence 
on  this  continent,  nearly  twice  as  long  as  the  whole  apostolic 
period,  they  were  practically  without  the  episcopate,  without 
the  three  orders  in  their  ministry,  even  without  confirmation 
in  their  membership,  yet  they  now  must  make  these  things 


Episcopal  Denominatioiis.  147 

the  conditions  of  any  church  standing  or  privilege  and  treat 
other  great  national  churches  around  them  as  if  they  were 
mere  sectaries  and  dissenters  who  had  assisted  at  the  execu- 
tion of  Charles  the  Martyr.  Gladly  we  hasten  to  add  that 
such  impediments  are  fast  disappearing.  With  the  decline 
of  international  hatred  this  Church  is  coming  to  the  front 
in  our  Anglo-American  civilization.  Its  liturgy  has  been 
made  flexible  by  revision  and  thrown  open  to  evangelistic 
influences.  It  is  becoming  distinguished  by  missionary  and 
popular  efforts  as  well  as  fashionable  attractions.  And 
after  having  been  long  deemed  a  mere  narrow  Christian 
caste,  it  has  suddenly  sent  forth  a  call  to  unity  the  most 
catholic  and  fraternal  that  has  been  heard  since  the  Reforma- 
tion, if  not  since  the  day  of  Pentecost.  It  is  not  the  Roman 
Church,  nor  yet  the  Anglican,  nor  even  any  reformed  church, 
but  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  which  is  now  leading 
the  grand  movement  for  the  reunion  of  Christendom. 

The  entire  group  of  episcopal  denominations,  though  so 
near  the  standard,  is  not  yet  rallied  around  it.  At  their 
origin,  however,  there  was  intercourse  between  them  and 
some  effort  for  unity.  The  elder  Muhlenberg  knelt  with 
White  in  Lambeth  Palace  to  receive  ordination  for  Lutheran 
parishes  in  Colonial  Virginia.  After  the  Revolution,  Bishop 
White  himself  favored  union  with  the  Methodists  as  well  as 
the  Lutherans.  The  Moravians  are  already  in  touch  with  the 
Lutherans  through  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  with  the 
Methodists  through  the  pietism  imparted  by  Zinzendorf  to 
Wesley,  and  have  been  formally  recognized  by  the  highest 
authorities  as  possessing  the  historic  episcopate.^  Such  fila- 
ments as  yet  may  seem  to  be  slight,  but  the  beginnings  of  all 
organic  life  are  faint  and  feeble. 

If  we  would  compare  the  groups  of  denominations  as  to 

1  "  Presiding  Bishop  Smith,  of  Kentucky,  proposed  an  organic  union  between 
the  Methodist  Episcopal  and  Protestant  Episcopal  Churches,  through  the  medium 
of  the  Moravian  Episcopate,  which  both  Churches  acknowledge."  The  Right 
Rev.  Paul  de  Schweinitz,  D.  D.  (Moravian). — Centttry  Magazine,  1887. 


148  The   Quad7Hlateral  Standard. 

their  numerical  strength,  we  shall  find  that  the  number  of 
their  ministers,  congregations,  and  communicants  might  be 
roughly  estimated  by  the  following  figures : — ^ 

Mmisters.  Congregations.  Connmtnicants. 
Congregational,    .    .    .  39,000                     62,000  5,000,000 

Episcopal, 46,000  70,000  ii,ooo,oco 

Presbyterial,      ....  24,000  32,000  3,000,000 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  ecclesiastical  denominations.  Epis- 
copal and  Presbyterial,  outnumber  the  Congregational  nearly 
two  to  one ;  and  when  we  remember  that  in  the  Congrega- 
tional group  are  included  many  evanescent  sects,  without 
historic  or  ecclesiastical  life,  while  in  the  Episcopal  group  is 
included  that  most  historic  ecclesiastical  body  in  the  world, 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church, — the  outlook  for  Church  Unity 
from  a  purely  ecclesiastical  point  of  view  will  not  seem  so 
discouraging  as  at  first  sight  might  be  inferred  from  the 
divided  state  of  our  American  Christianity. 

The  results  of  our  survey  are  now  before  us.  It  has  become 
apparent  that  the  work  of  Church  Unity  must  consist  in 
restoring  ecclesiastical  elements  to  congregational  denomina- 
tions, in  completing  ecclesiastical  elements  in  presbyterial 
denominations,  and  in  recovering  or  legitimating  such  ele- 
ments in  episcopal  denominations.  If  these  views  be  correct, 
it  would  seem  to  follow  that  the  educational  process  may 
most  hopefully  begin  in  the  most  churchly  denominations  and 
thence  react  with  cumulative  power  upon  the  least  churchly, 
until  all  have  regained  the  four  conditions  of  unity.  Such  a 
massing  or  fusing  of  the  chief  ecclesiastical  bodies,  or  historic 
churches,  would  also  exert  a  tremendous  conservative  in- 
fluence, as  much  needed  in  our  whole  civilization  as  in  our 
Christianity.  Could  the  Lutheran,  Reformed,  and  Presby- 
terian Churches,  by  gaining  the  historic  episcopate,  become 
annexed  or  consolidated  with  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
within    the    limits    of  the    Quadrilateral   they   would    stand 

^  Taken  in  round  numbers  from  Dr.  Caroll's  "  Religous  Forces  of  the  United 
States." 


Episcopal  Denominations.  .  149 

together,  like  the  impregnable  square  at  Waterloo,  against  all 
the  assaults  of  surrounding  infidelity,  irreligion,  and  vice. 

It  has  been  well  said  that  anomalies  are  incident  to  a  state 
of  transition.  They  appear  in  social  movements  as  well  as 
in  organic  processes.  The  independent  colonies  before  they 
became  the  United  States  were  a  sort  of  political  hydra  or 
many-headed  body  politic.  We  may  have  to  endure  such 
anomalies  during  the  transition  to  a  united  church.  In  fact 
we  already  have  them,  in  clusters  of  legitimate  bishops  claim- 
ing the  same  jurisdiction,  such  as  a  Roman  Catholic  and  a 
Protestant  Episcopal  bishop  of  New  York.  Imagine  also  in 
that  city  a  Moravian,  a  Lutheran,  and  a  Presbyterian  Bishop, 
all  having  the  true  historic  episcopate,  and  Church  Unity 
would  look  like  a  monstrous  spectre.  Yet  the  very  appear- 
ance of  such  anomalies  would  hasten  their  decline.  As  fast 
as  the  grounds  and  bonds  of  true  unity  came  into  distinct 
consciousness,  the  rival  episcopates  would  become  consoli- 
dated in  one  official  personage  or  in  some  true  hierarchical, 
system.  Besides,  these  inconsistencies  are  not  yet  upon 
us  as  matters  of  practical  concern,  and  may  even  be  pre- 
vented by  rapid  unifying  processes,  some  of  which  are 
already  conceivable.  Adjacent  congregations,  by  their  own 
fellowship,  might  pass  at  once  under  the  same  bishop  ;  pres- 
byterial  bodies  might  unite  with  episcopal  in  electing  the  same 
bishop  ;  and  episcopal  colleges  might  readjust  diocesan  and 
provincial  boundaries.  Some  passing  events  may  show  that 
the  visionary  future  of  church  unity  is  not  all  a  region  of 
chimeras. 

The  most  practical  question  now  emerging  relates  to  the 
method  of  promoting  an  understanding  and  adoption  of  the 
Quadrilateral  standard  of  church  unity  by  the  Christian 
denominations.  Two  methods  may  be  pursued  ;  the  one  de- 
nominational, the  other  undenominational.  The  former  would 
identify  the  Four  Articles  with  the  denomination  which  pos- 
sesses them  most  fully  and  make  the  work  of  extending  that 


150  The  Q2iad7Hlatei'al  Siandaj^d. 

denomination  throughout  our  American  Christianity  equiva- 
lent to  the  work  of  Church  Unity. 

Church  Unity  Societies. 

This  is  the  method  adopted  by  the  Church  Unity  Societies 
of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church.  It  has  some  obvious 
advantages.  At  first  sight,  indeed,  it  would  seem  to  be  the 
most  natural,  if  not  the  only  method  to  be  pursued.  The 
denomination  which  alone  professes  the  Quadrilateral  stand- 
ard might  claim  to  be  primarily  and  especially  fitted  to  rally 
around  it  other  denominations  or  individual  Christians  who 
do  not  as  yet  profess  it.  Moreover,  as  a  mere  manifesto  or 
abstract  declaration  it  would  lack  that  social  force  and 
propagandist  zeal  which  it  would  gain  as  attached  to  a  com- 
pact denominational  organization,  moving  like  a  Roman 
legion  or  with  the  effect  of  a  strategic  wedge,  among  the  less 
disciplined  sects  around  it.  It  may  be  added,  that  the  Prot- 
estant Episcopal  Church,  besides  already  having  the  prestige 
of  the  Lambeth  articles,  has  also  some  accessional  attractions 
arising  from  its  place  in  English  history  and  its  increasing 
adaptability  to  our  own  American  civilization,  as  well  as  its 
organic  affinities  with  both  Catholicism  and  Protestantism.  If 
that  church  can  be  so  expanded  and  popularized  as  to  gather 
within  its  pale  all  other  denominations  with  their  various 
standards  of  doctrine,  polity,  and  worship  so  far  as  not  in- 
consistent with  the  Lambeth  Articles, — I  for  one  would  bid 
it  God  speed.  I  would  throw  no  obstacle  before  the  chariot- 
wheel  of  such  a  church  triumphant.  The  obstacles  in  the 
way  are  not  wholly  external.  They  inhere  in  that  denomina- 
tion itself  rather  than  in  the  Quadrilateral  standard  which  it 
now  bears  to  the  front.  Let  me  state  them  frankly  and  in 
the  most  friendly  spirit. 

At  the  outset.  Church  Unity  Societies  encounter  a  popular 
sus,picion  of  denominational  proselytism  seemingly  inconsist- 
ent with  their  own  avowed  aim.  This  suspicion  may  be  and 
often  is  wholly  unreasonable,  but  it  exists  and  must  be  dealt 


Church    Unity  Societies.  1 5 1 

with  by  all  who  approach  the  question.  It  even  finds  some 
color  in  a  few  forward  churchmen  who  are  always  antagoniz- 
ing the  other  churches  and  denominations  around  them,  and 
giving  the  impression  that  church  unity  means  confessing 
the  sin  of  dissent  and  conforming  to  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church.  Whether  their  contention  be  true  or  not,  it  is  not 
wise  to  say  it  under  the  olive  branch.  It  savors  more  of 
a  battle  than  of  truce  and  peace.  It  is  true,  many  other 
churchmen  have  the  true  conciliatory  spirit  and  catholic 
feeling;  yet  they  honestly  believe  that  the  way  to  the  goal  lies 
through  the  national  predominance  of  their  own  church  ;  and 
it  is  not  easy  for  the  unthinking  observer  to  distinguish  even 
such  church  unity  from  mere  church  aggrandizement.  These 
difficulties,  it  must  be  granted,  are  largely  sentimental,  and  may 
wear  away  in  the  progress  of  opinion  and  the  lapse  of  time. 
They  are  already  disappearing  from  generous  minds.  "  Of 
course,"  says  the  Presbyterian  Dr.  DeWitt,  "the  Episcopal 
Church  hopes  to  '  capture  '  American  Christianity.  Nor  do 
I  think  it  an  unworthy  ambition  for  them  to  cherish.  They 
are  convinced  that  they  possess  an  element  of  primitive 
Christianity  in  the  grace  of  orders  conferred  through  the 
historic  Episcopate,  which  we  should  find  highly  valuable; 
and  their  desire  to  communicate  it  we  ought  not  to  confound 
with  arrogance.  No  doubt  some  of  them  are  arrogant,  but 
some  of  us  can  match  them." 

A  more  inherent  difficulty  lies  in  the  exclusive  claim  which 
must  be  put  forth  by  Church  Unity  Societies.  They  belong 
to  a  denomination  which  denies  the  church  standing  of  other 
denominations,  and  even  largely  ignores  any  church-like  ele- 
ments which  they  possess.  The  legitimacy  of  such  a  claim 
is  not  here  in  dispute.  The  fact  only  of  its  existence  at 
present  concerns  us,  and  it  is  a  stumbling  block  in  our  path. 
There  can  be  no  misunderstanding  a  churchman  who  intelli- 
gently believes  that  other  Christian  bodies  are  badly  organ- 
ized, pseudo-ecclesiastical  types,  which  he  would  rather  see 
exterminated  than  preserved  and  perfected  toward  a  purer. 


152  The   Quadrilateral  Standard. 

fuller  type  of  church  life.  He  may  be  right,  on  the  principle 
of  the  survival  of  the  fittest,  could  that  principle  be  applied. 
But  right  or  wrong,  it  is  a  great  infelicity  in  his  position  as 
an  advocate  of  church  unity  among  such  Christian  bodies. 
It  looks  to  them  as  if  he  only  wished  to  build  up  church 
unity  on  the  ruins  of  other  churches  by  undermining  them, 
dissolving  them,  and  absorbing  them  as  individual  Christians, 
or  as  congregations,  into  his  own  organization.  Even  if  this 
must  be  the  final  issue,  to  openly  avow  it  and  proceed  toward 
it  is  a  repellant  and  mistaken  policy.  Enlightened  churchmen 
may,  indeed,  and  often  do,  nobly  disclaim  such  aims  and 
methods,  but  the  difficulty  still  inheres  in  the  very  bearing  of 
their  church  toward  other  Christian  denominations  professing 
and  calling  themselves  churches.  It  has  been  brought  into 
public  view  by  the  recent  Bishops'  Symposium,  and  has 
caused  a  temporary  arrest  to  the  whole  movement. 

Another  difficulty  arises  from  the  ecclesiastical  parties  of 
which  Church  Unity  Societies  must  be  composed.  They  hold 
esoterically  such  variant  views  of  the  Quadrilateral  itself  as 
make  it  more  or  less  repugnant  to  the  other  denominations 
to  which  they  proffer  it.  There  is  no  need  to  discuss  these 
views,  but  only  to  state  them  in  order  to  see  their  embarrass- 
ing effect.  Easily  enough,  a  high  churchman  attaches  the 
dogma  of  apostolic  succession  to  the  historic  episcopate, 
makes  the  sacraments  depend  upon  a  sacerdotal  theory  of 
the  ministry,  accepts  the  creeds  as  all  but  inspired  symbols  and 
subordinates  the  Scriptures  to  a  form  of  ecclesiastical  infalli- 
bilism.  Such  opinions  are  favored  by  some  expressions  in  the 
Prayer-book  and  by  the  tenor  of  modern  Anglican  teaching. 
Perhaps  they  are  considered  as  sound  by  a  majority  of  the 
American  clergy.  But  sound  or  unsound,  if  infused  into  the 
Quadrilateral,  they  simply  destroy  it  as  a  basis  of  unity  with 
other  Protestant  denominations.  They  do  not  even  allow 
as  much  standing  room  as  is  already  allowed  the  low  and 
broad  church  parties,  and  if  pressed  to  their  due  issue  would 
make  church  unity  as  impossible  inside  as  outside  the  pale. 


Church  Unity  Societies.  153 

Generously  as  liberal  churchmen  may  repudiate  such  partizan- 
ship  and  insist  upon  the  breadth  and  freedom  of  the  new 
platform,  yet  behind  them  may  still  be  discerned  a  more 
dominant  school  who  would  narrow  its  limits  or  abolish  it 
altogether.  The  result  is  that  the  Quadrilateral  has  become 
surcharged  with  the  most  extreme  interpretations,  attracting 
or  repelling  the  surrounding  denominations  as  one  church 
party  or  the  other  expounds  its  terms  of  unity.  While  such 
misrepresentation  of  it  continues  among  its  own  adherents,  it 
can  only  appear  to  others  as  a  scandal,  or  as  a  paradox. 

It  should  be  added  that  Church  Unity  Societies  are  encum- 
bered in  their  efforts  by  certain  purely  denominational  tenets, 
which  are  less  acceptable  than  the  Four  Articles.  They  hold 
to  the  Quadrilateral  as  already  imbedded  in  their  Prayer- 
book  and  Ordinal,  in  connection  with  doctrines,  rites  and 
canons  peculiar  to  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  distinc- 
tion from  other  denominations.  It  is  true,  that  it  is  separ- 
able in  thought  from  these  church  standards;  but  it  is  not  yet 
so  separated  in  fact,  or  in  the  popular  mind.  It  is  true,  also, 
that  it  has  been  proposed  to  separate  it  in  form,  as  a  new 
constitutional  provision  for  including  other  Christian  bodies 
within  the  pale  of  the  Church,  and  guaranteeing  to  them  their 
own  special  doctrines  and  usages,  so  far  as  not  inconsistent 
with  the  Four  Terms  of  Unity.  But  this  portentous  policy 
has  not  yet  been  fully  discussed  and  adopted  ;  and  were  it 
adopted  it  is  not  certain  that  some  other  Christian  bodies, 
especially  those  of  continental  origin,  would  care  at  once  to 
merge  their  power  and  prestige  in  the  Anglo-American 
episcopate.  Moreover,  have  not  the  bishops  themselves 
expressly  disclaimed  any  wish  to  absorb  other  communions? 
For  the  present,  at  least,  whatever  the  future  may  have  in 
store  for  us,  Protestant  Episcopalians  are  somewhat  embar- 
rassed by  their  own  church  standards  in  the  movement  for 
Catholic  Unity,  on  the  basis  of  the  Lambeth  articles.^ 


1  "  It  is  true  as  well  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  as  of  all  the  churches, 
that  nothing  in  her  which  is  really  catholic  is  inconsistent  wilh  organic  Christian 


154  '^f^^   Quadinlateral  Standard. 

Having  thus  frankly  stated  these  difificulties,  I  may  now 
the  more  freely  add  that  I  do  not  think  them  insuperable,  or 
even  so  grave  as  to  prevent  a  great  and  good  work  from 
being  done  by  those  who  can  subordinate  denominational  ad- 
vancement to  catholic  unity,  or  even  by  some  who  are  fain  to 
make  the  one  identical  with  the  other  ;  nor  M^ould  I  disparage 
the  great  good  which  has  already  been  done  in  spite  of  these 
difficulties  by  large-minded  churchmen  in  the  cause  of  unity. 
Dr.  McConnell  becomes  conscious  of  them  only  to  rise 
superior  to  them,  when  he  says :  "  In  this  process  of  rebuild- 
ing [the  Church  of  the  future],  what  shall  become  of  iis? 
Dare  we  venture  to  throw  our  jewels  into  the  crucible  and 
trust  them  to  the  fires  ?  If  they  are  pure  metal  we  may, 
otherwise  we  may  not.  I  for  one  am  so  thoroughly  assured 
of  the  intrinsic  excellence  of  the  things  we  value,  our  Orders, 
our  Liturgy,  our  religious  traditions,  that  I  am  willing  to 
trust  them  to  the  regenerating  fires  !  "  ^ 

My  object  in  this  discussion  has  been  simply  to  open  the 
way  for  considering  another  wholly  undenominational  agency 
which  is  free  from  the  difficulties  mentioned,  whatever  other 
difficulties  may  attend  it,  and  which  at  the  same  time  would 
not  antagonize  the  Church  Unity  Society,  but  only  supple- 
ment and  complement  its  effort  by  moving  from  a  different 
point  of  departure,  over  a  different  quarter  of  the  field, 
toward  the  same  general  result. 

Catholic  Unity  Leagues. 
A  Catholic  Unity  League  or  Circle  (the  name  is  not  essen- 
tial) would  embrace  representatives  of  the  leading  Christian 
denominations  or  church  polities,  congregational  and  presby- 
terial,  as  well  as  episcopal,  voluntarily  associated  on  the  basis 
of  the  Quadrilateral  with  the  view   of  promoting  its  better 

Unity ;  but  that  everything  which  is  inconsistent  with  that  unity  is  essentially 
sectarian." — "The  Stumbling  Block,"  Rev.  Wra.  Chauncy  Langdon,  D.  D., 
Christian  Literature ,  January,  1S94. 

^  Address  to  Church  Unity  Society  of  Pennsylvania,  by  Rev.  S.  D.  McCon- 
nell, D.D. 


Catholic  Unity  Leagues.  i55 

understanding  and  general  adoption.     These  objects  it  might 
seek  by  studious  conference  and  friendly  discussion,  by  at- 
tracting other  like-minded  inquirers  and  leading  them  to  form 
affiliated   leagues    or   circles,  by  embodying  consentient  re- 
sults in  carefully  written  papers,  and  at  length  by  taking  pub- 
lic measures,  through  the  periodical   press   or  by  a  special 
organ  of  publication,  to  develop,  express,  and  organize  the 
growing  church   unity  feeling  which  pervades  in  various  de- 
grees all  the  Christian  denominations.     Some  grave  objec- 
tions to  such  an  agency  at  once  start  into  view.     It  will  be 
said  that  it  would   appear  somewhat  vague  in  its  aim.s ;  it 
would  combine  the  most  heterogeneous  opinions,  traditions 
and  tastes  ;  it  would  hold  its  members  together  by  the  mere 
threads  of  brotherly  feeling,  intellectual  enjoyment  and  spir- 
itual  recreation ;    it  might  even  seem  to  compromise  their 
existing  relations  to  denominational  pulpits,  chairs  and  editor- 
ships, from  which  they  must  officially  speak  on  other  occa- 
sions'; and  should  it  find  solid  ground  of  agreement  in  the 
Four  Articles,  it  might  then  lack,  as  a  mere  voluntary  associa- 
tion, the  organic  force  and  propagandist  zeal  needed  to  give  it 
full  practical  effect.     So  far  as  these  objections  are  inherent 
in  the  scheme  and  peculiar  to  it,  let  us  at  once  admit  them 
and  proceed  to  consider  some  advantages  which  may  out- 
weigh them. 

From  the  start  an  advantage  is  gained  by  the  undenomina- 
tional point  of  departure  taken  by  such  a  Catholic  League. 
There  can  be  no  suspicion  or  fear  of  sinister  or  secondary 
aims  in  a  circle  which  welcomes  all  denominations  to  equal 
rights  and  powers  within  the  ample  limits  of  the  Quadrilateral. 
In  fact  it  presents  the  only  alternative  to  some  purely  denomi- 
national effort  like  that  of  the  Church  Unity  Society.  The 
members  of  other  churches  could  not  consistently  and  freely 
combine  with  that  Society  in  promoting  the  Lambeth  stand- 
ard until  it  is  planted  somewhere  outside  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church.  Even  if  other  churches  should  adopt 
that  standard,  or  anything  like  it,  there  would  still  be  room 


156  The   Quadrilateral  Standard. 

and  reason  enough  for  some  more  catholic  circle  in  which  their 
representatives  might  meet  unembarrassed  and  free  to  con- 
verge their  common  aims  toward  the  one  desired  result. 
After  all  that  can  be  done  in  awakening  Christian  brother- 
hood, in  securing  denominational  federation,  in  expanding  a 
historic  church,  there  will  still  remain  a  more  extensive  sphere 
of  thought  and  action  where  these  same  parties  might  com- 
plete their  several  efforts  and  bring  them  to  harmonious  issue 
and  full  effect.  In  other  words,  Brotherhoods  of  Christian 
Unity,  Schemes  of  Congregational  or  Presbyterial  or  Episco- 
pal Federation,  Church  Extension  Societies,  need  not  be  in- 
consistent with,  but  only  preparatory  and  auxiliary  to,  a 
League  for  the  promotion  of  the  Catholic  Unity  of  Chris- 
tendom. 

Another  advantage  of  such  a  league  is  the  varied  composi- 
tion of  its  membership.  It  would  include  all  the  parties 
interested  in  the  problem  of  church  unity  and  bring  them 
together  under  circumstances  favorable  to  the  frankest  and 
fullest  comparison  of  views.  It  is  a  common  remark,  that  the 
churches  need  to  become  better  acquainted  before  they  can 
even  intelligently  consider  the  question  of  unity.  They  are 
separated,  not  merely  by  known  doctrinal  differences,  but  by 
barriers  of  inherited  prejudice,  popular  ignorance  and  denomi- 
national jealousy,  which  melt  away  in  social  intercourse  and 
free  discussion.  Even  their  doctrinal  differences  under  such 
influences  will  appear  in  a  true  light,  not  necessarily  as 
diminished  or  even  modified,  but  as  real  convictions  and  for- 
midable difficulties,  which  must  be  honestly  and  carefully 
considered  in  seeking  a  just  agreement.  The  Pedobaptist, 
who  may  have  thought  the  question  of  immersion  trivial,  will 
learn  to  respect  it  in  a  Baptist  who  presents  it  with  learning, 
logic,  candor,  and  courtesy.  The  Congregationalist,  who  may 
have  eschewed  all  creeds  as  mere  ecclesiastical  figments,  will 
more  truly  estimate  them  in  a  churchman  who  exposes  their 
essential  truths  as  common  to  our  Christianity  no  less  than  to 
that  of  Nicaea.     The  Episcopalian,  who  may  have  regarded 


Catholic  Unity  Leagues.  157 

Presbyterian  sacraments  as  wholly  invalid  and  ineffective,  as 
well  as  irregular,  may  be   surprised  to  find  them  animated  by 
the  doctrine  of  his  own  ritual.     And  all  these  parties,  who 
mieht  otherwise  have  been  indifferent  or  estranged,  will  see 
themselves  drawing  more  closely  together,  should  they  find 
that  they  could  accept  at  least  the  first  three  Lambeth  articles 
without  any  sacrifice  of  principle,  of  consistency,  or  of  dignity. 
There  would  be  a  special  advantage  in  bringing  together  in 
such  circles  representatives  of  the  three  polities,  congrega- 
tional   and   presbyterial    as   well  as   episcopal.     The   crucial 
point  in  the  whole  inquiry  is  the  Fourth  Article,  and  since 
the   historic  episcopate,  when   divested  of  all    dogmas    and 
theories  concerning  it,  presents  itself  simply  as  a  question  of 
church  polity,  it  is  of  prime  importance  that  such  dogmas  and 
theories  should  sink  out  of  view  while  we  are  considering  its 
claims  and  merits  as  a  Christian  institution.    Let  this  be  done, 
and  the  problem  of  unity  becomes  at  once  simplified  and  dis- 
engaged  from    everything  adventitious.      The   advocates  of 
the  three  polities   will   appear  as  the  only  parties   properly 
concerned   in  the  question;  and  their  conferences  in  these 
new  and  direct  relations  may  soon  reveal  existing  bonds  of 
organic  unity,  where  otherwise  would  have  been  heard  only 
the  wrangle  of  ritualist  and  evangelist,  dogmatist,  and  ration- 
alist, each  claiming  the  episcopate  as  his  own  property.     The 
purest  Congregationalist  would  see  that  the  self  government 
of  the  local  church  might  be  guarded  even  while  admitting 
presbytery  and  episcopacy  into  the  outer  sphere  of  associated 
and    consociated    churches.      The   staunchest    Presbyterian 
would  find  that  the  parity  of  the  ministry  need  not  be  sacri- 
ficed by  choosing  a  permanent  moderator,  like  the  primitive 
bishop,  to    exercise    the    episcopal    functions  of  presbytery. 
The  highest  Episcopalian  would  discover,  not  only  that  he 
already  has  much  practical    presbyterianism    and  Congrega- 
tionalism  in   his   own  system,  but  also   that  new    forms   of 
episcopacy  are  emerging  in   the  congregational  and  presby- 
terial bodies  around  him.     In  a  word,  the  representatives  of 


158  The   Quadrilateral  Standard. 

all  three  polities,  becoming  thus  conscious  of  organic  bonds 
rather  than  of  mere  sentimental  professions  or  doctrinal  com- 
promises, would  be  ready  to  accept  the  Fourth  Article  as  the 
most  unifying  point  in  the  Quadrilateral,  and  realize  in  their 
own  circle  a  miniature,  if  not  an  embryo  of  true  church  unity. 
Besides  these  advantages  such  a  circle  would  afford  the 
only  educational  agency  adapted  to  the  present  state  of  opin- 
ion. As  we  have  seen,  the  denominations  and  churches  are 
not  yet  ready  for  the  Quadrilateral,  but  only  in  various  stages 
of  approach  toward  it  under  reactionary  influences  and  educa- 
tional processes ;  and  no  existing  agency  or  organization  can 
fully  express  those  influences  and  rightly  guide  those  pro- 
cesses. A  Church  Unity  Society  largely  expresses  denomi- 
national views  and  only  affords  the  teaching  of  a  propaganda. 
A  conference  of  ecclesiastical  commissioners,  like  that  between 
the  Presbyterian  and  Episcopal  Churches,  could  not  exceed 
the  binding  instructions  which  had  been  received,  and  would 
in  its  very  nature  and  tendency  be  more  conservative,  if  not 
obstructive,  than  progressive.  But  a  voluntary  group  of  in- 
quirers, freed  from  everything  sectarian  or  official,  would  also 
be  free  not  only  to  study  the  Four  Articles  in  relation  to  their 
respective  denominations,  but  to  give  the  results  of  their  studies 
to  the  Christian  public  in  the  manner  most  likely  to  be  effec- 
tive and  practical.  All  denominations  would  have  before 
their  eyes  a  visible  embodiment  of  the  Lambeth  ideal  of 
unity  in  a  band  or  league  of  loyal  Congregationalists,  Presby- 
terians and  Episcopalians,  loving  denominationalism  not  less, 
but  only  Church  Unity  more.  There  might  even  be  thus 
formed  a  model  or  nucleus  around  which  other  bands  or 
leagues  or  like  agencies  could  gather,  developing,  expressing 
and  organizing  the  growing  ecclesiastical  tendencies  of  our 
American  Christianity.  At  length,  by  such  means,  it  is  con- 
ceivable, the  Church  Unity  Society  might  see  its  own  aim 
accomplished  differently,  and  the  inter-ecclesiastical  commis- 
sion would  only  meet  to  ratify  a  unity  which  had  already 
been  spontaneously  achieved.     As  Dr.  Langdon  profoundly 


Studies  in  the   Quadrilateral.  159 

remarks,  "  Great  discoveries  in  thought  and  great  revolutions 
in  religious  truth,  as  little  as  in  the  realms  of  geography  and 
physics,  are  made  not  by  official  and  responsible  committees 
duly  appointed  by  authority  and  formally  charged  with  that 
duty ;  but  by  or  through  irresponsible  enthusiasts  who  repre- 
sent no  one,  it  may  be,  but  the  Divine  Spirit  by  whom  alone 
they  hold  themselves  impelled." 

Let  it  be  added  that  the  Lambeth  Conference  itself  has 
recognized  the  propriety  as  well  as  the  advantage  of  such  an 
educational  agency.  It  has  virtually  planted  the  Quadrilat- 
eral standard  outside  of  the  Church  of  England  and  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  among  the  Christian  denomina- 
tions, by  recommending  them  to  study  it  in  connection  with 
"  the  authoritative  standards  of  doctrine,  worship,  and  govern- 
ment adopted  by  the  different  bodies  of  Christians  into  which 
the  English  speaking  races  are  divided."  We  may  therefore 
repeat  with  emphasis  the  statement  that  a  Catholic  League 
would  be  not  only  concurrent  with  all  general  efforts  for 
Christian  Unity  but  complemental  to  the  special  effort  for 
Church  Unity.  On  the  one  hand  it  would  include  Congrega- 
tionalists  and  Presbyterians  who  elsewhere  may  be  laboring 
for  congregational  and  presbyterial  federation  ;  and  on  the 
other  hand,  Episcopalians  who  elsewhere  maybe  laboring  for 
the  expansion  of  the  Episcopal  Church.  It  might  even  in- 
clude Lutherans  who  are  seeking  to  recover  the  Swedish 
episcopate,  and  Old  Catholics  who  would  aim  to  reform  the 
Roman  episcopate,  should  such  advocates  of  Church  Unity 
arise.  In  a  word,  it  would  rally  typical  representatives  of  all 
the  Christian  denominations  around  the  Lambeth  standard 
in  a  supreme  effort  to  combine  them,  at  least  ideally  and  at 
length  actually,  in  one  United  Church  of  the  United  States. 

Studies  in  the  Quadrilateral. 
The  studies  of  such  a  circle  will  be  many  and  sometimes 
perplexing.     Frequent  conferences  may  be  needed  in  order  to 
settle  even  preliminary  questions  referring  to  the  Quadrila- 


i6o  The   Qitadrilateral  Standard. 

teral,  before  it  can  be  intelligently  and  cordially  accepted  as 
a  tentative  basis  of  agreement. 

At  the  threshold  will  arise  some  general  questions  as  to 
the  church  unity  in  view ;  its  nature,  value  and  feasibility. 
Distinctions  will  be  drawn  between  the  kingdom  of  God  as 
proclaimed  by  our  Lord  in  the  Gospels,  and  the  church  of 
Christ  as  instituted  and  described  by  his  Apostles  in  their 
Acts  and  Epistles  ;  between  this  church  of  the  Apostles  as 
established  in  their  own  time  and  the  church  of  history  as 
succeeding  it  through  the  Christian  centuries  ;  between  the 
visible  church  of  to-day  as  a  human  organization  and  the  in- 
visible church  of  all  time  as  a  divine  organism.  Against  the 
opposite  views  resulting  from  these  distinctions,  it  may  be 
urged  that  the  distinctions  themselves  are  unwarrantable,  fal- 
lacious and  misleading ;  that  the  gospels  and  epistles  are  in- 
separable, either  being  useless  without  the  other;  that  the 
apostolic  church  was  simply  the  organized  kingdom  of  Christ ; 
that  the  historic  church  is  distinctively  a  providential,  not 
a  merely  Satanic  development  of  the  apostolic  church  ;  and 
that  the  church  visible  is  necessarily  but  the  embodiment  and 
expression  of  the  church  invisible,  being  divine  as  well  as 
human.  Between  the  extreme  views,  a  safe  intermediate 
ground  may  be  found  in  the  Quadrilateral  as  affording  the 
conditions  of  one  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church. 

More  special  difficulties  will  be  raised  as  to  each  Article. 
From  the  Holy  Scriptures,  as  the  first  rallying  point,  the  ways 
will  be  seen  parting,  on  the  one  side  through  the  successive 
stages  of  biblical  infallibilism,  ecclesiastical  infallibilism,  papal 
infallibilism,  and  on  the  other  side  through  the  consecutive 
stages  of  critical  rationalism,  exegetical  rationalism,  dogmatic 
rationalism.-^  Amid  all  this  divergence  the  limiting  way-mark 
will  be  the  acceptance  of  the  Bible  as  a  "common  rule  of  faith 
containing  all  things  necessary  to  salvation." 

As  to  the  Second  Article  it  will  be  objected  that  the  Nicene 

1  See  the  author's  "  Fhilosophia  Ultima,"  vol.  ii,  pp.  372-391. 


Studies  in  the   Quadrilateral.  i6i 

Creed  is  antiquated  in  its  origin,  metaphysical  in  its  terms,  and 
incomplete  in  its  statement  of  doctrines.  It  will  be  replied 
that  it  is  antiquated  as  eternal  truth  is  antiquated,  and  guards 
against  errors  as  active  in  our  age  as  in  the  first  age  of  the 
church;  that  it  is  metaphysical  as  all  divinity  is  metaphysical, 
and  no  more  recondite  than  the  first  chapter  of  St.  John;  that 
if  it  does  not  include  some  special  dogmas  of  the  Reformation, 
yet  neither  does  it  exclude  them,  but  contains  them  germin- 
ally  and  allows  them  so  far  as  they  are  supplemental  and  con- 
sistent. The  essential  point  is  that  it  is  the  only  "  statement 
of  the  Christian  faith  "  that  the  whole  church  has  ever  put  forth 
and  maintained,  and  therefore  is  "  sufficient "  for  the  purpose 
of  unity  as  serving  to  connect  the  whole  church  of  the  past 
with  the  whole  church  of  the  present. 

As  to  the  Third  Article  more  serious  difficulties  will  emerge 
into  view.  On  doctrinal  grounds  the  Baptist  will  object  to 
the  church  membership  of  infants;  on  lexical  grounds  to  any 
mode  of  baptism  but  immersion  ;  and  on  ecclesiastical  grounds 
to  communion  with  any  Christians  but  those  who  have 
been  immersed.  The  Pedobaptist  can  only  reply  that  the 
membership  of  infants  is  made  complete  by  their  own  confes- 
sion of  faith  when  they  have  reached  years  of  discretion  ;  that 
immersion  is  legitimate  as  well  as  sprinkling;  and  that  even 
a  local  Baptist  communion  might  be  maintained  provisionally 
in  a  large  church  system.  In  like  manner,  the  circle  will 
seem  divided  by  ritualistic  and  evangelistic  views  of  the  Holy 
Supper,  as  celebrated  at  an  altar  or  a  table,  and  by  the  new 
questions  of  the  temperance  chalice,  individual  cups  and 
other  details  of  the  ministration.  But  in  spite  of  accumulat- 
ing difficulties  in  regard  to  both  sacraments  all  will  be  able 
to  unite  in  the  requirement  of  an  "  unfailing  use  of  the  very 
words  and  elements  appointed  by  Christ  himself." 

The  Fourth  Article  will  remain  as  the  crucial  point  around 

which  all  other  difficulties  become  intensified.     Evangelical 

and  rationalistic  theories  of  the  ministry  will  stand  contrasted 

with  sacerdotal  and  hierarchical  theories.    Congregationalism, 

zi 


1 62  The   Quadrilateral  Standard. 

Presbyterianism,  and  Episcopalianism  will  assert  their  respec- 
tive claims.  How  these  questions  will  adjust  themselves  has 
been  shown  in  a  former  essay  and  also  may  appear  in  the 
next  essay.  The  emphatic  point  is,  that  the  historic  episco- 
pate is  to  be  accepted  not  as  a  theory  of  the  ministry  but  as 
including  all  such  theories ;  not  as  the  Roman  papacy  or 
as  the  Anglican  prelacy,  but  as  the  one  catholic  ministry, 
"  locally  adapted  "  to  the  Congregationalist,  Presbyterian,  and 
Episcopalian  denominations  of  our  own  American  Christi- 
anity. 

The  connection  of  the  four  articles  may  also  be  found 
important.  The  first  as  joined  to  the  second  article  makes 
the  catholic  creeds  accordant  with  the  Holy  Scriptures.  The 
second  as  joined  to  the  third  makes  the  Apostles'  Creed  the 
baptismal  symbol  or  confession  of  faith,  and  the  Nicene  Creed 
the  eucharistic  confession  of  the  communion  of  saints.  The 
third  as  joined  to  the  fourth  secures  the  validity  of  the  sacra- 
ments by  a  legitimate  ministry.  And  the  fourth  article  as 
connected  with  the  other  three  articles  secures  the  mainten- 
ance of  sound  doctrine  and  holy  living  in  the  church. 

Even  the  order  of  the  four  articles  might  be  made  signifi- 
cant and  advantageous.  They  are  stated,  not  in  a  doctrinal 
but  in  a  practical  order,  not  according  to  historical  but  logical 
sequence.  If  it  be  true,  doctrinally  or  historically,  that  in 
the  age  of  the  apostles  the  ministry  gave  forth  the  gospel 
sacraments,  the  sacraments  led  to  the  formation  of  the  catho- 
lic creeds,  and  the  creeds  were  at  length  followed  by  the 
completed  canon  of  Scripture  ;  yet  practically  and  logically, 
in  the  present  state  of  opinion,  the  Scriptures  must  first  be 
accepted  as  the  rule  of  faith,  and  then  the  creeds  as  the  suffi- 
cient statement  of  Scriptural  doctrine,  and  then  the  sacraments 
as  conveying  the  benefits  expressed  in  the  creeds,  and  at  length 
the  episcopate  as  the  complement  of  the  congregational  and 
presbyterial  elements  of  polity.  The  denominations  now 
must  retrace  the  steps  of  the  early  church  and  recover  in  an 
inverse  order  its  bonds  of  unity.     Already  it  is  apparent  that 


The  League  of  Catholic  Unity.  163 

they  can  accept  the  first  three  articles  long  before  the  last. 
While  then  the  four  points  may  be  considered  with  advan- 
tage separately  and  in  any  order,  yet  the  best  order  in  which 
to  approach,  study,  and  accept  them  is  the  order  in  which 
they  have  been  presented. 

If  now  we  seek  for  a  full  yet  concise  expression  of  the 
principles  of  such  a  league  as  has  been  described  there  would 
result  some  formula  of  concord  like  the  following  : — 

The  League  of  Catholic  Unity. 

We,  whose  names  are  subscribed,  devoutly  seeking  the 
Divine  guidance  and  blessing,  hereby  associate  ourselves  as  a 
League  for  the  promotion  of  the  Catholic  Unity  of  Christen- 
dom. 

Without  detaching  ourselves  from  the  Christian  denomina- 
tions to  which  we  severally  belong,  or  intending  to  compro- 
mise our  relations  thereto,  or  seeking  to  interfere  with  other 
efforts  for  Christian  unity,  we  accept,  as  worthy  of  the  most 
thoughtful  consideration,  the  four  principles  of  Church  Unity 
proposed  by  the  bishops  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
at  Chicago,  in  1886,  and  amended  by  the  Lambeth  Confer- 
ence of  1888,  as  follows  : — 

"  L  The  Holy  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments, 
as  containing  all  things  necessary  to  salvation,  and  as  being 
the  rule  and  ultimate  standard  of  faith. 

"  n.  The  Apostles'  Creed,  as  the  baptismal  symbol,  and  the 
Nicene  Creed,  as  the  sufficient  statement  of  the  Christian 
faith. 

"  in.  The  two  sacraments  ordained  by  Christ  himself, 
Baptism  and  the  Supper  of  the  Lord,  ministered  with  unfail- 
ing use  of  Christ's  words  of  institution,  and  of  the  elements 
ordained  by  Him. 

"  IV.  The  historic  episcopate,  locally  adapted  in  the  methods 
of  its  administration  to  the  varying  needs  of  the  nations  and 
peoples  called  of  God  into  the  unity  of  His  church." 

We  believe  that  upon  the  basis  of  these  four  principles  as 


164  The   Quad7dlateral  Standard. 

articles  of  agreement,  the  unification  of  the  Christian  denom- 
inations of  this  country  may  proceed  cautiously  and  steadily, 
without  any  radical  alteration  of  their  existing  standards  of 
doctrine,  polity,  and  worship,  and  with  only  such  concessions 
as  they  might  reasonably  make  in  a  spirit  of  brotherly  love 
and  harmony,  for  the  sake  of  unity  and  for  the  furtherance  of 
all  the  great  ends  of  the  Church  of  Christ  on  earth.  This 
will  appear  the  more  closely  each  of  these  articles  is  exam- 
ined. 

The  Holy  Scriptures  are  already  our  accepted  rule  of  faith, 
however  we  may  differ  among  ourselves  concerning  the  mode 
of  their  inspiration  and  interpretation. 

The  Apostles'  and  Nicene  Creeds,  being  in  accordance  with 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  do  already  express  the  catholic  belief 
and  doctrine,  without  precluding  the  more  particular  confes- 
sions, to  which  we  are  severally  attached,  such  as  the  Augs- 
burg Confession,  the  Heidelberg  Catechism,  the  Thirty-nine 
Articles,  the  Westminster  Confession,  and  other  symbols  or 
formularies  not  inconsistent  with  these  two  catholic  creeds. 

The  Sacraments  of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  as  insti- 
tuted by  Christ  himself  and  administered  with  his  own 
appointed  words  and  elements,  are  already  recognized  among 
us  as  the  badges  and  media  of  church  membership  and  com- 
munion, although  we  do  not  yet  agree  as  to  particular  modes 
of  their  administration  or  special  qualifications  for  their  recep- 
tion, or  even  theories  of  their  efficacy. 

The  Historic  Episcopate  in  various  forms  already  prevails 
extensively  throughout  the  Christian  world  ;  and  as  con- 
nected with  the  Scriptures,  the  Creeds,  and  the  Sacraments, 
it  would  secure  a  legitimate  catholic  ministry  to  all  Christian 
denominations,  and  might  become  a  bond  of  organic  unity 
among  them,  by  completing  their  congregational,  or  presby- 
terial,  or  episcopal  systems,  and  at  length  recombining  them 
normally  in  one  Catholic  Apostolic  Church. 

In  order  to  promote  a  better  understanding  of  these  articles, 
we   recommend,  as  proposed  by  the   Lambeth   Conference, 


The  League  of  Catholic  Uiiity.  165 

that  they  be  carefully  studied  in  connection  with  "  the  author- 
itative standards  of  doctrine,  worship,  and  government  adopted 
by  the  different  bodies  of  Christians,  into  which  the  English- 
speaking  races  are  divided  ;  "  and  we  reverently  and  lovingly 
invoke  the  countenance  and  aid  of  the  Bishops  of  the  Protes- 
tant Episcopal  Church,  and  of  all  other  catholic  bishops  and 
Christian  ministers  of  every  name,  who  may  join  this  League 
or  any  like  associations  for  studious,  prayerful  and  brotherly 
conference  with  a  view  to  the  unification  of  Christendom, 

May  our  united  prayers  be  so  blended  with  the  prevalent 
intercession  of  our  ascended  Lord,  that  we  shall  all  become 
one  in  Him,  for  the  glory  of  His  eternal  Father,  for  the  good 
of  His  Church,  and  for  the  redemption  of  the  world. 


VI. 

THE  HISTORIC  EPISCOPATE  AND  THE 
THREE  CHURCH  POLITIES. 


VI. 

THE  HISTORIC  EPISCOPATE  AND  THE  THREE  CHURCH 

POLITIES. 

The  chief  Christian  denominations  may  be  grouped  in  three 
classes  according  to  their  structural  principles  :  the  congrega- 
tional, as  including  the  Baptist,  Congregational  and  Unitarian 
Churches;  the  presbyterial,  as  including  the  Presbyterian,  the 
Reformed  (Dutch  and  German)  and  the  Lutheran  Churches ; 
the  episcopal,  as  including  the  Moravian,  Methodist,  Protes- 
tant Episcopal,  Reformed  Episcopal,  and  Roman  Catholic 
Churches.  As  nearly  all  these  bodies  both  in  law  and  in 
courtesy  are  entitled  churches,  the  question  of  their  consolida- 
tion as  united  Churches,  or  their  comprehension  in  one  united 
Church,  may  be  termed  in  general,  the  question  of  Church 
Unity.  And  the  problem  is  to  find  a  bond  or  system  under 
which  they  may  all  be  embraced  in  their  integrity,  or  with  as 
little  sacrifice  as  possible  of  their  several  views  of  doctrine, 
polity  and  worship. 

Preliminary  Principles. 
In  approaching  this  great  question  we  need  to  remind  our- 
selves of  one  or  two  premises  from  which  to  reason.  The 
first  is  our  common  Christianity.  We  already  agree  in  those 
essential  tenets  which  distinguish  the  Christian  religion  from 
other  religions  and  warrant  us  to  call  ourselves  Christians. 
Between  our  Roman  Catholic  brethren  at  the  extreme  right 
and  our  Unitarian  friends  at  the  extreme  left,  the  other 
denominations  stand  together  around  the  great  central  facts 
and  truths  of  Christianity.  This  Christian  unity,  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  now  pervades  all  Christian  bodies  in  so  far  as  they  are 
truly  Christian,  and  becomes  expressed  in  more  or  less  Chris- 

169 


170  The  Historic  Episcopate. 

tian  union  whenever  they  associate  for  great  Christian  ends. 
But  Church  union  or  Church  unity,  in  addition  to  our  common 
Christianity ;  the  association  of  Christian  bodies  by  means  of 
the  same  ecclesiastical  principles  in  one  ecclesiastical  system 
— this  is  yet  to  be  attained.  Does  the  historic  episcopate 
afford  the  bond  or  link  of  such  Church  unity  ? 

A  second  premise  is  the  legitimacy  of  the  Christian  denomi- 
nations. They  have  won  their  right  to  be.  They  have  a  clear 
providential  warrant  for  their  existence.  Congregationalism, 
Presbyterianism,  Episcopalianism  may  stand  severally  for  great 
ecclesiastical  principles  or  institutions,  which  are  taught  if  not 
delineated  in  Holy  Scripture,  which  appeared  together  in  the 
apostolic  Church,  which  were  reaffirmed  separately  at  the 
Reformation,  which  since  then  have  been  maintained  through 
fierce  struggles  in  the  Old  World,  and  in  the  New  World  have 
at  length  found  free  scope  and  full  development.  Such  prin- 
ciples are  not  to  be  risked  lightly  in  any  scheme  of  Church 
unity.  They  cannot  be  ignored  or  over-ridden.  They  should 
at  least  be  weighed  carefully  and  estimated.  At  the  same 
time,  these  same  principles,  it  must  be  granted,  are  often 
pushed  to  sinful  extremes  and  have  become  an  occasion  of 
immense  evils.  They  have  been  made  to  exalt  the  sect  above 
the  Church  and  to  dismember  the  body  of  Christ.  They  have 
torn  its  organization  limb  from  limb.  They  certainly  do  not 
cohere  now,  as  once  in  the  church  of  the  Apostles.  And  the 
question  is,  whether  through  the  historic  episcopate  they  might 
not  be  restored  to  their  pristine  normal  relationship,  become 
legitimated  and  recombined  and  ever  kept  in  harmonious 
action  ? 

A  third  premise  is  the  subordination  of  denominationalism 
to  Church  unity.  Not  the  extinction  of  denominations,  or,  at 
least,  not  the  extinction  of  any  ecclesiastical  principles  which 
they  may  contain,  but  their  incorporation  in  the  Church  as 
legitimate  parts  of  its  organism.  Let  there  be  the  greatest 
freedom  and  variety  as  to  modes  of  worship  and  lesser  doc- 
trines, but  all  within   the   same  ecclesiastical   system.     Let 


Preliminary  Principles.  171 

existing  denominations  still  continue,  but  only  with  the  hope 
of  becoming  more  congruous  and  cooperative  as  living  mem- 
bers of  one  body.  If  we  cannot  come  to  the  question  in  this 
spirit,  we  shall  only  waste  time  in  discussing  it.  If  we  begin 
by  preferring  mere  denominationalism  to  Church  unity  we 
shall  simply  end  by  inviting  one  another  into  some  congrega- 
tional, or  presbyterial,  or  episcopal  millennium,  or  else  fall  back 
upon  some  sentimental  invisible  unity  which  only  glorified 
saints  and  angels  might  realize.  The  invisible  Church  or 
Church  of  the  Future  is  not  within  our  reach.  We  have  to  do 
with  the  visible  Church  of  the  present.  Taking  its  various 
denominations  as  we  find  them,  let  us  study  their  actual  con- 
sensus of  doctrines,  their  organic  affinities,  their  points  of 
vital  contact,  their  complemental  relations,  their  growing 
similarities.  Let  us  ask  if  Baptist  and  Pedobaptist  congrega- 
tions, Lutheran  and  Reformed  presbyteries,  Methodist  and 
Protestant  Episcopal  bishops  might  not  combine,  not  indeed 
at  once  in  one  Church  organization,  but  at  least  in  the  same 
general  Church  system,  the  congregation  concurring  with  the 
presbytery  and  the  presbytery  with  the  bishop  as  to  all  matters 
outside  their  several  spheres.  In  a  word,  let  us  see  if  through 
and  within  the  historic  episcopate  the  chief  Christian  denomina- 
tions might  not  find  comprehension  without  compromise,  con- 
cord without  concession,  unity  without  uniformity,  oneness 
amid  variety. 

But  what  is  the  historic  episcopate  ?  It  may  mean  very 
much  or  very  little,  according  to  its  definition ;  and  its  defini- 
tion will  be  full  or  meager,  according  to  our  point  of  view. 
At  present  we  can  only  view  it  in  its  external  relations,  as  a 
Christian  institution  appearing  among  other  Christian  institu- 
tions and  organizations.  I  do  not  here  pretend  to  define  it 
per  se  as  an  ecclesiastical  dogma;  much  less  to  give  an  inside 
view  of  its  powers  and  effects  upon  those  who  devoutly 
receive  it.  I  will  aim  at  little  more  than  a  verbal  definition 
of  the  phrase  itself. 

Christianity  is  historic.     It  has  had  organic  life  and  growth 


172  The  Historic  Episcopate. 

from  the  beginning.  It  was  more  than  mere  sentiment  or 
doctrine.  It  was  a  church  as  well  as  a  gospel.  It  has  ever 
been  visibly  organized,  with  fixed  institutions  persisting  from 
age  to  age  until  the  present  time.  Among  those  institutions 
is  the  historic  episcopate.  Thus  viewed  it  may  be  defined 
negatively  and  then  more  positively. 

The  Scriptural  Episcopate. 
In  the  first  place,  the  historic  episcopate  is  distinguishable 
from  the  scriptural  episcopate.  It  may  or  may  not  have  been 
enjoined  in  the  Scriptures.  On  this  point  all  are  not  agreed, 
but  all  must  admit  the  historical  fact  that  sooner  or  later  the 
Episcopal  institution  did  exist  in  the  church  and  ever  since 
has  been  accepted  by  an  overwhelming  majority  of  Christians 
in  all  ages  and  countries.  As  to  the  mode  of  its  origin  we 
have  the  high  authority  of  the  late  learned  Bishop  of  Durham, 
Dr.  Lightfoot.  In  his  commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the 
Philippians  he  maintains  that  the  episcopate  was  formed  out 
of  the  presbyterate  as  the  need  for  central  unity  became  felt 
among  the  scattered  congregations  and  presbyteries  which 
the  apostles  had  planted.  And  this  is  the  very  need  which  is 
now  felt  by  the  very  same  parties,  by  the  congregational, 
presbyterial,  and  episcopal  denominations  of  this  country. 

The  Apostolic  Episcopate. 
In  the  second  place,  the  historic  episcopate  is  distinguish- 
able from  the  apostolic  episcopate.  Whether  the  apostles  as 
such  had  any  official  successors  is  in  dispute  ;  but  no  one  can 
deny  that  they  were  actually  followed  in  course  of  time  by 
bishops  presiding  over  presbyteries  and  congregations.  The 
learned  prelate  before  cited  traced  the  growth  of  this  episco- 
pate historically  as  a  rational  process,  the  bishops  at  first  be- 
coming centers  of  unity,  and  at  length  claiming  succession 
from  the  apostles  as  guardians  of  faith  and  order.  In  the 
same  way  ministers  now  refer  to  church  founders  for  their 
authority  and  doctrine ;  and  however  we  may  theorize  about 


Modern  New-made  Episcopacy.  173 

it,  the  fact  of  some  apostolic  succession  is  as  certain  as  the 
fact  of  transmitted  power  in  any  regular  ministry,  presby- 
terial  as  well  as  episcopal.  Indeed,  some  of  the  fathers, 
Irenaeus,  Clement  of  Alexandria  and  St.  Jerome,  found  this 
succession  in  both  presbyters  and  bishops,  and  it  was  only  by 
degrees  that  the  apostolate  was  claimed  for  the  bishops  alone. 

The  Modern  New-made  Episcopate. 

In  the  third  place,  the  historic  episcopate  is  distinguishable 
from  the  modern  new-made  forms  of  episcopacy.  Whatever 
else  these  may  be,  they  are  not  historical.  The  Reformed 
Episcopalians  can  claim  to  have  a  non-apostolic  episcopate; 
the  Methodist  Episcopalians  may  claim  to  have  an  evan- 
gelical episcopate  ;  the  Irvingite  Episcopalians,  or  Apostolic 
Catholics,  lay  claim  to  a  miracle  working  episcopate;  but 
none  of  these  parties  could  claim  to  have  the  historic  episco- 
pate. In  fact,  they  have  already  disclaimed  or  renounced  it. 
For  this  reason,  were  there  no  other,  the  Reformed  Episcopal 
Church  cannot  become  the  conciliator  in  our  unhappy  divi- 
sions. It  has  taken  dogmatic  ground  openly  against  historic 
episcopacy,  if  not  against  all  Catholic  Christianity.  It  may 
have  some  other  good  and  high  mission,  but  its  mission  is 
not  to  promote  church  unity.  In  such  unity  the  claims  of 
episcopal  as  well  as  other  churches  must  be  duly  satisfied, 
and  ritualistic  as  well  as  evangelistic  views  of  the  ministry 
must  be  at  least  tolerated. 

By  urging  these  distinctions  I  do  not  mean  to  prejudge  the 
scriptural,  or  the  apostolic,  or  even  the  Reformed  episcopate. 
The  things  distinguished,  though  separable  in  thought,  are  not 
always  separate  in  belief  On  the  contrary,  the  great  major- 
ity adhering  to  the  historic  episcopate  believe  it  to  be  both 
scriptural  and  apostolic,  having  the  didactic  force  of  inspira- 
tion and  the  special  grace  of  a  divine  institution.  Other  ad- 
herents, however,  think  that  it  arose  providentially  out  of 
the  wants  of  the  early  Church,  in  accordance  with  apostolic 
example  and  Scripture  doctrine,  but  with  no  exclusive  legiti- 


174  1^^^  Historic  Episcopate. 

macy.  Still  others,  waiving  the  authority  both  of  the  Scrip- 
tures and  of  the  Apostles,  find  their  warrant  for  it  in  its  mere 
expediency  or  fitness  to  the  existing  circumstances  of  the 
Christian  religion.  All  these  views  are  found  consistent  with 
loyal  attachment  to  the  institution  itself,  and  their  concur- 
rence in  upholding  it  may  show  at  once  its  breadth  and  its 
stability. 

Comprehensiveness  of  the  Historic  Episcopate. 
As  we  pass  to  a  positive  definition  or  description  we  shall 
see  still  more  clearly  how  comprehensive  is  this  great  Chris- 
tian institution.  Not  only  did  its  original  structure  involve 
congregational  and  presbyterial  elements,  synagogues  and 
elders  as  well  as  bishops,  but  its  historic  growth  has  per- 
vaded the  whole  Christian  world.  As  instituted  at  first  by 
our  Lord  himself  in  the  work  of  the  apostles,  they  exempli- 
fied it  in  their  acts  and  epistles,  while  planting  and  training 
the  first  parishes  and  presbyteries.  Thenceforward,  it  ex- 
tended over  the  entire  Church  through  the  centuries  before 
the  Council  of  Nice.  After  the  great  schism  it  was  continued 
in  both  the  eastern  and  western  sections  of  Christendom  un- 
til the  Reformation.  At  the  present  day  on  its  Catholic  side, 
as  maintained  in  the  Old  World,  it  embraces  the  ecclesiastical 
principles  of  the  Greek,  Roman,  and  the  Anglican  Churches, 
while  on  its  Protestant  side  as  developed  in  the  New  World, 
it  has  also  embraced  the  ecclesiastical  principles  of  the  Lu- 
theran, the  Reformed,  the  Presbyterian,  the  Methodist,  the 
Congregational,  the  Baptist  Churches.  It  has  embraced  them 
actually,  even  if  not  consciously  or  avowedly.  Without  sac- 
rificing the  episcopal  principle,  it  has  incorporated  the  presby- 
terial principle  in  diocesan  conventions  and  standing  commit- 
tees and  the  congregational  principle  in  free  parishes  and 
vestries.  As  good  Congregationalism  and  as  sound  Presby- 
terianism  can  be  found  inside  the  American  Episcopate  as 
outside  of  it.  And  could  our  various  congregational  and 
presbyterial   denominations   now   come  together   under  the 


Its  Alleged  Hierarchism.  175 

same  stringent  yet  elastic  bond,  through  bishops  of  their  own 
choice,  with  their  creeds  and  usages  untouched,  they  would  do 
no  violence  to  their  respective  missions  in  this  new  age  and 
country.  They  would  simply  retrace  the  steps  by  which 
unity  was  reached  in  the  New  Testament  Church,  when  the 
first  congregations  and  presbyteries  became  united  under 
bishops  after  the  apostles  had  ceased  from  their  labors. 

No  other  church  system  is  at  once  so  large  and  cohesive. 
Not  the  congregational,  because  of  its  localizing  tendency  and 
inorganic  state ;  not  the  presbyterial,  because  of  its  brittle 
structure  and  lack  of  centralizing  force;  not  the  episcopal 
alone,  without  the  congregational  and  presbyterial  institutions, 
with  which  it  must  ever  be  in  living  connection.  The  three 
elements  as  fitly  joined  in  one  organism  make  an  ideal  unity; 
and  it  is  a  unity  which  might  become  actual.  At  the  center 
of  our  divided  and  distracted  Christianity  we  have  before  our 
eyes  the  spectacle  of  Episcopalians,  Presbyterians,  and  Con- 
gregationalists,  in  all  but  the  name,  loyally  held  together  by 
this  Historic  Episcopate  in  the  catholic  faith  of  Christendom. 

Its  Alleged  Hierarchism. 
But  here  we  are  met  by  two  grave  objections.  It  is  alleged 
that  this  historic  episcopate  has  ever  tended  to  hierarchy,  as 
seen  conspicuously  in  that  Roman  papacy  and  Anglican 
prelacy  from  which  we  have  escaped  only  through  grievous 
wars  and  persecutions.  Undoubtedly  such  scruples  would 
have  had  force  in  Europe  some  generations  ago.  Whatever 
good  ends  the  abnormal  sway  of  the  Latin  episcopate  may 
have  served  providentially  in  the  mediaeval  civilization,  its 
greater  evils  could  only  be  cured  by  the  Reformation.  Such 
evils  however,  do  not  menace  us  now  in  this  free  land.  Nor 
can  we  imagine  a  prelatic  peerage  among  its  free  churches. 
A  congestion  of  church  power  in  bishops  is  about  the  last 
danger  that  we  have  to  fear.  The  whole  drift  of  our  times  is 
the  other  way,  and  with  terrific  momentum  toward  the  wildest 
license  in  Church  and  State.  We  have  to  face  the  anarchy 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  not  the  hierarchy  of  the  Middle 


176  The  Historic  Episcopate, 

Ages.  Good  Christian  people,  I  sometimes  fancy,  can  be 
frightened  by  the  mere  word  hierarchy,  and  seem  often  to 
cherish  an  inherited  dread  of  it,  which  religious  demagogues 
may  but  too  easily  inflame  in  thoughtless  moments.  And 
this,  too,  while  the  Pope  himself  is  but  a  prisoner  in  the  Vati- 
can and  the  church  of  Archbishop  Laud  seems  to  be  on  the 
verge  of  disestablishment. 

Its  Alleged  Sacerdotalism. 

It  is  further  charged  that  this  historic  episcopate  has  bred 
sacerdotalism  in  the  ministry.^  The  candid  Bishop  Lightfoot 
has  replied  that  the  priesthood  of  believers  only  becomes  ex- 
pressed through  the  priesthood  of  ministers,  who  faithfully 
represent  the  people  to  God  as  well  as  God  to  the  people,  in 
divine  service.  Without  pursuing  the  question,  however,  it 
is  enough  here  to  say  that  it  is  misplaced  in  a  discussion 
which  bears  upon  the  terms  of  Church  Unity  rather  than 
upon  the  truth  or  falsity  of  special  doctrines.  You  need 
not  agree  with  ritualists  while  making  common  cause  with 
them  against  sectarianism,  infidelity  and  vice ;  nor  approve, 
because  you  tolerate  them  as  differing  brethren  in  the  house- 
hold of  faith.  If  I  read  aright,  some  ritualists  as  well  as 
revivalists,  v/ere  allowed  in  the  one  Church  of  the  Apostles, 
neither  of  them  without  good  advice.  That  episcopacy  has 
no  invariable  connection  with  sacerdotalism  is  shown  in  its 
evangelical  pulpits  and  plain  services  as  well  as  by  Moravian 
spirituality  and  Methodist  fervor.  That  it  is  not  exclusively 
committed  to  any  partisan  view  of  the  ministry  and  sacra- 
ments is  but  a  proof  of  its  unifying  capacity  and  organizing 
power.  Moreover,  at  a  time  when  great  foes  of  our  common 
faith  are  mustering  before  us,  we  need  a  leadership  which  can 
marshal  into  battle  both  the  extreme  right  and  left  wings  of 
the  Church  militant. 


1  This  popular  hindrance  to  Church  unity  has  been  judiciously  treated  by  the 
Rev.  G.  Woolsey  Hodge,  of  Philadelphia,  in  a  tract  entitled  "  Sacerdotalism  and 
Sacramentarianism. ' ' 


Studies  in  the  Historic  Episcopate.  177 

In  justice  let  it  be  added,  that  neither  hierarchical  nor  sacer- 
dotal claims  have  been  put  before  us  as  terms  of  Church 
unity.  Not  the  Roman  papacy  nor  the  Anglican  prelacy,  but 
simply  the  historic  episcopate  as  adapted  to  American  Christi- 
anity ;  not  the  priestly  view  of  the  sacraments,  but  simply  the 
sacramental  words  and  acts  themselves,  whatever  theories 
may  be  held  as  to  their  meaning  and  efficacy.  The  truth  is, 
the  Fourth  Article  of  the  Quadrilateral  is  being  subjected  to 
a  double  misrepresentation.  On  the  one  hand  many  are 
surcharging  it  with  doctrines  which  it  does  not  require,  and 
on  the  other  hand  many  are  discharging  it  of  doctrines  which 
it  does  not  exclude.  But  as  the  mists  clear  away  we  may 
hope  to  see  the  Historic  Episcopate  standing  out  in  full  view 
simply  as  a  primitive  and  catholic  institution,  in  which  Con- 
gregationalists  and  Presbyterians  as  well  as  Episcopalians  can 
find  a  broad,  yet  firm  basis  of  ecclesiastical  unity.  That  it 
is  possible  thus  to  treat  it  may  appear  in  the  following  pro- 
gramme of  studies,  which  has  been  used  by  some  representa- 
tives of  the  three  polities  in  their  conferences  on  the  subject. 

Studies  in  the  Historic  Episcopate. 

I. 

Christianity  began  historically  as  a  church  no  less  than  as 
a  gospel;  with  institutions  as  well  as  with  doctrines  ;  having 
an  organization  to  secure  the  ministry  of  the  Word  and  Sac- 
raments. And  in  some  organized  form  it  has  ever  since  con- 
tinued for  nearly  twenty  centuries. 

The  lover  of  church  unity  must  recognize  the  fact  of  this 
historic  continuity,  whatever  he  may  think  of  its  origin  and 
value. 

II. 

The  historic  continuity  of  the  church  may  be  considered  in 
three  forms : — 

First,  as  Congregational ;  the  continuance  of  a  Christian 
people  from  the  Apostles'  time. 


12 


178  The  Historic  Episcopate, 

Second,  as  Presbyterial ;  the  continuance  of  a  Christian 
ministry  of  the  Word  and  Sacraments. 

Third,  as  Episcopal ;  the  continuance  of  Bishops  as  well  as 
Presbyters  in  the  Christian  ministry. 

The  lover  of  church  unity  may  personally  hold  any  one  of 
these  three  views  of  historic  continuity,  but  not  any  one  of 
them  to  the  exclusion  of  the  others. 

The  historic  episcopate  alone  includes  all  three  views,  with- 
out excluding  any  one  of  them  ;  and  therefore  affords  the 
only  practicable  basis  of  church  unity. 

III. 

This  historic  episcopate  may  be  estimated  variously  : — 

First ;  That  it  simply  secures  the  advantages  of  order, 
regularity,  and  good  government  in  Christian  society. 

Second  ;  That  it  secures  a  divine  authority  in  the  ministry 
of  the  Word  and  the  Sacraments,  without  which  other  min- 
istries are  merely  human  and  unauthorized. 

Third ;  That  it  conveys  a  supernatural  grace,  without  which 
the  Word  and  Sacraments  fail  of  their  due  and  full  effect. 

The  lover  of  church  unity,  instead  of  discussing  these  esti- 
mates, accepts  the  historic  episcopate  simply  as  a  fact,  having 
his  own  doctrine  or  theory  of  its  value.  Its  practical  fitness 
as  a  basis  of  unity  appears  in  the  variety  of  such  theories  and 
doctrines  among  its  loyal  adherents. 

IV. 

In  view  of  these  principles  the  general  problem  of  Church 
unity  may  be  distributed  into  several  special  inquiries  : — 

(i)  The  Relation  of  Congregationalism  (Orthodox,  Unita- 
rian, Baptist)  to  the  Historic  Episcopate. 

(2)  The  Relation  of  Presbyterianism  (Lutheran,  Reformed, 
Presbyterian)  to  the  Historic  Episcopate, 

(3)  The  Relation  of  Episcopalianism  (Methodist,  Reformed, 
Protestant)  to  the  Historic  Episcopate. 

(4)  The  Relation  of  Special  Episcopates  (Greek,  Roman, 
Anglican)  to  the  Historic  Episcopate, 


VII. 

THE  HISTORIC  PRESBYTERATE  AND 
THE  HISTORIC  EPISCOPATE. 


VII. 

THE  HISTORIC   PRESBYTERATE   AND    THE   HISTORIC 

EPISCOPA  TE. 

It  has  become  plain  that  the  historic  episcopate  is  the  piv- 
otal question  in  the  debate  upon  church  unity.  The  three 
other  points  proposed  by  the  House  of  Bishops  have  raised 
but  little  discussion.  Indeed,  they  scarcely  need  to  be  dis- 
cussed ;  at  least,  not  in  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  nor 
in  the  Presbyterian  Church.  These  two  bodies,  without 
changing  their  standards  or  forfeiting  their  autonomy,  could 
to-day,  if  so  minded,  unite  in  confessing  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
the  Nicene  Creed  and  the  two  Sacraments  as  an  actual  con- 
sensus, setting  forth  the  great  things  in  which  they  agree  in 
distinction  from  the  small  things  in  which  they  differ.  But 
under  such  a  league  the  historic  episcopate  would  still  be 
viewed  as  a  remaining  barrier  between  them  rather  than  a 
ground  or  link  of  organic  affinity.  As  to  that  matter  no  con- 
sensus has  yet  been  defined,  and  it  may  even  be  thought  that 
none  exists. 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  some  effects  of  the  Chicago  declar- 
ation appear  discouraging.  Amid  many  expressions  of  Chris- 
tian feeling  it  has  brought  the  old  denominational  lines  more 
sharply  into  view  and  provoked,  in  some  quarters,  a  fresh 
outburst  of  the  sectarian  spirit.  The  responding  churches 
have  simply  re-asserted  their  respective  positions  and  for  the 
moment  seem  farther  apart  than  ever.  But  such  strange 
manifestations  of  division  on  the  face  of  a  deep-seated  popular 
movement  toward  church  unity  can  only  be  regarded  as  de- 
ceptive and  transient.  Look  beneath  them  at  the  facts.  For 
a  whole  generation  the  Young  Men's  Christian  Association 
has   been   undermining    denominationalism   throughout   the 

i8i 


1 82  The  Historic  Presbyter  ate. 

land.  Great  revivals  have  been  breaking  down  the  barriers 
between  the  churches  and  fusing  them  into  practical  oneness. 
Liturgical  forms  of  prayer  and  praise  have  been  fostering  their 
common  faith  and  worship.  The  Evangelical  Alliance,  the 
American  Congress  of  Churches,  the  Washington  Conference, 
have  successively  brought  together  their  leaders  on  national 
platforms  for  consultation  and  cooperation.  Nearly  every 
historic  church  has  been  seeking  closer  relations  with  its 
neighbors.  At  length  one  of  them  proposes  four  terms  of 
unity,  only  to  be  assailed  at  once  on  all  sides.  Why  such  a 
volley  at  a  flag  of  truce  ?  Why  such  a  recoil  in  mid  progress  ? 
Surely  it  is  worth  while  to  look  deeper  into  the  subject. 

Appeal  to  both  Episcopalians  and  Presbyterians. 

In  offering  some  thoughts  upon  church  unity,  addressed  at 
once  to  Episcopalians  and  to  Presbyterians,^  I  beg  to  disclaim 
any  sense  of  special  vocation  or  mission.  Nothing  could  be 
more  absurd  or  more  thankless  than  a  self-appointed  media- 
tion. Whoever  breaks  from  the  ranks  on  either  side  can  only 
risk  a  cross-fire  from  both  sides.  He  may  also  be  charged 
with  ignorance  as  well  as  rashness.  Nevertheless,  it  is  a 
Christian  duty  to  study  this  great  problem  in  a  catholic  spirit; 
and  if  any  one  reaches  conclusions  which  bethinks  important 
and  timely  he  can  respectfully  tender  them,  and  let  them  pass 
for  what  they  are  worth.  He  will  at  least  have  bestowed  his 
mite  in  a  cause  which  all  should  have  at  heart.  In  such  a 
spirit  I  would  submit  a  view  of  the  fourth  term  of  unity  which 
I  have  not  seen  anywhere  clearly  stated  or  fully  discussed. 
It  is  briefly  this  : — 

The  historic  episcopate,  as  neither  enjoining  nor  forbidding  any 
doctrine  of  apostolic  succession. 

It  will  be  seen  that  I  use  that  happily  chosen  phrase,  "  the 
historic  episcopate,"  in  its  literal  meaning.     It  gives  no  hint 

1  The  first  part  of  this  paper  appeared  simultaneously  in  The  New  York  Evan- 
gelist and  The  Churchman. 


Apostolical  Succession.  183 

of  any  doctrine  of  apostolical  succession.  Yet  many  such 
doctrines  are  known  to  exist.  Old-fashioned  Presbyterians 
hold  to  an  apostolic  succession  in  the  presbyterate,  though 
attaching  to  it  but  little  value.  Episcopalians  of  all  schools, 
except  such  as  deny  it  outright,  find  it  in  the  episcopate,  but 
rate  it  variously  in  a  scale  somewhere  between  zero  and  in- 
finity. According  to  some,  the  doctrine  is  not  set  forth  in 
the  Scriptures,  nor  even  in  the  Prayer-book,  but  is  simply  an 
inferential  tenet  or  incidental  fruit  of  church  growth  in  history. 
According  to  others,  the  apostolate  which  has  been  trans- 
mitted was  not  a  divine  institution,  but  a  mere  ecclesiastical 
office, securing  the  advantages  of  good  government.  Accord- 
ing to  others,  only  the  apostolic  functions  of  oversight  and 
discipline  have  been  transmitted.  According  to  others,  with 
these  functions  have  been  continuously  illustrated  simply  the 
true  apostolic  doctrine,  character,  and  spirit.  According  to 
others,  over  and  above  such  gifts,  a  divine  authority  has  been 
committed  by  our  Lord  himself  through  his  apostles  to  their 
successors,  rendering  all  other  ministries  illegitimate,  irregu- 
lar, and  dubious.  According  to  others,  a  special  supernatural 
grace  inheres  in  the  apostolic  episcopate,  without  which  the 
word  and  sacraments  cannot  become  means  of  salvation. 
And  so  on,  until  we  reach  the  climax  in  the  learned  Dodwell, 
who  wrote  a  treatise  to  prove  that  immortality  itself,  not  being 
natural  to  man,  is  a  supernatural  gift  in  baptism,  which  only 
the  bishops  as  successors  of  the  apostles  can  confer. 

Now  all  these  various  doctrines  do  indeed  touch  upon  vital 
interests.  It  cannot  be  a  matter  of  indifference  which  of  them 
is  true.  It  may  be  important,  it  is  important,  for  every  one  to 
decide  which  is  true  for  him  and  which  he  will  maintain  to 
the  end.  But  this  is  not  the  question  here  before  us;  nor  is 
it  the  burning  question  of  the  hour.  The  present  problem  is 
to  find  a  basis  of  church  unity  broad  enough  and  firm  enough 
for  existing  church  organizations.  And  you  will  certainly 
narrow  and  weaken  that  basis  by  either  selecting  for  it  or 
rejecting  from  it  any  of  the   doctrines   mentioned.      As  an 


184  The  Historic  Presbyter  ate. 

Episcopalian,  you  will  commit  your  own  church  to  a  mere 
party  and  vainly  ask  other  churches  to  unite  with  it  on  a 
ground  where  it  is  not  itself  united,  and  perhaps  never  can 
be.  As  a  Presbyterian  you  will  forego  all  claims  of  your 
own  church  to  true  catholicity  and  leave  no  ground  on  which 
to  unite  with  other  Catholic  Churches.  In  either  case  you 
will  not  help  forward  the  cause  of  church  unity.  Glance  for 
a  moment  at  some  of  the  injurious  effects  of  such  partisanship 
on  both  sides. 

Apostolical  Succession  not  Enjoined. 
On  the  one  hand  it  would  only  be  hurtful  to  enjoin  a  doc- 
trine of  apostolical  succession.  Dear  to  you  as  such  a  doc- 
trine may  be,  and  fundamental  as  it  may  seem,  you  could  not 
make  it  a  term  of  unity  in  the  existing  state  of  opinion.  By 
taking  such  ground  you  would  at  once  assail  the  liberal  and 
evangelical  portion  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  and 
repel  all  the  other  Protestant  Churches  around  you,  together 
with  all  the  ecclesiastical  elements  which  they  contain.  You 
would  repel  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,  that  bulwark 
of  the  Reformation,  with  its  six  thousand  ministers,  its  high 
ritual,  its  rich  erudition,  its  conservative  traditions  and  catho- 
lic affinities.  You  would  repel  the  Presbyterian  Church,  that 
backbone  of  American  orthodoxy,  with  its  twelve  thousand 
ministers,  its  historic  presbyterate,  its  solid  learning,  its  ear- 
nest spirituality,  organizing  skill  and  potent  ecclesiasticism. 
You  would  repel  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  that 
pioneer  of  American  Christianity,  with  its  forty  thousand 
ministers,  its  dormant  prayer  book  and  Articles,  its  scriptural 
simplicity,  apostolic  zeal  and  pentecostal  fervor.  In  a  word, 
you  would  repel  nine-tenths  of  our  ecclesiastical  Protestantism 
and  be  left  with  a  mere  formal  catholicity. 

Apostolical  Succession  not  Forbidden. 
On  the  other  hand  however,  it  would  be  as   hurtful,  if  not 
more  hurtful,  to  forbid  a  doctrine  of  apostolical  succession. 


Apostolical  Succession.  185 

Weak  and  untenable  as  such  doctrine  may  be  deemed  by 
you,  it  runs  through  all  historic  Christianity,  and  should  you 
exclude  it  from  your  basis  of  unity  you  would  thereby  ex- 
clude the  great  Catholic  churches  of  Christendom.  You 
would  exclude  them  not  merely  as  European  but  as  Ameri- 
can organizations  to  which  we  are  bound  by  common  aims 
and  interests.  You  would  exclude  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church,  the  mother  of  churches,  the  church  of  scholars  and 
saints  such  as  Augustine  and  Aquinas  and  Bernard  and  Fene- 
lon  ;  the  church  of  all  races,  ranks  and  classes,  which  already 
gives  signs  of  becoming  American  as  well  as  Roman,  and  the 
only  church  fitted  by  its  hold  upon  the  working  masses  to 
grapple  with  that  labor  problem  before  which  our  Protestant 
Christianity  stands  baffled  to-day.  You  would  exclude  also 
the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  the  beautiful  daughter  of  a 
beautiful  mother,  claiming  a  lineage  of  apostles,  saints  and 
martyrs,  the  church  which  still  hails  from  the  home  of  our 
Anglo-Saxon  Christianity,  from  altars  at  which  Knox  and 
Bucer  ministered,  from  cloisters  in  which  our  Westminster 
standards  were  born,  and  from  colleges  out  of  which  came 
our  Whitefield  and  Wesley  with  tongues  of  flame  ;  the  church 
which  daily  offers  Lutheran,  Reformed  and  Presbyterian 
prayers  in  its  liturgy,  and  the  one  church  which  now  seeks  to 
win  back  the  wrangling  sisterhood  of  churches  home  again. 
In  a  word  you  would  exclude  five-sixths  of  Christendom,  and 
be  left  with  a  mere  sectarian  Protestantism. 

Moreover,  through  such  partisanship  your  rallying-point 
of  unity  would  actually  become  a  starting  point  of  fresh  divi- 
sions. You  would  drive  whole  groups  of  Christians  and 
churches  around  new  sectarian  centers.  Those,  on  the  one 
side,  who  begin  to  value  the  Episcopate  as  a  custodian  of  the 
Prayer-book,  a  complement  of  presbytery,  and  a  guarantee  of 
regularity,  would  seek  such  advantages  in  Reformed  Episco- 
pacy or  in  Methodist  Episcopacy,  or  in  a  liturgical  Presbyte- 
rianism.  Those,  on  the  other  side,  who  have  learned  to  prize 
the  historic  Christianity  which  gathered  the  canonical  Scrip- 


1 86  The  Historic  Presbyter  ate, 

tures,set  forth  the  ecumenical  creeds  and  framed  the  Orthodox 
system  of  doctrine,  would  find  it  within  that  Roman  Catholic 
episcopate  which  still  spurns  at  all  our  parvenu  churchman- 
ship,  with  claims  everywhere  unchallenged.  At  the  same 
time  those  larger  Christ-like  souls,  who  can  take  both  sides 
of  Christendom  into  view,  would  lose  all  hope  of  any  true 
Catholicity  and  matured  Christianity.  It  is  because  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  stands  between  these  extremes, 
at  once  protesting  against  Roman  error  and  maintaining 
Catholic  truth,  that  to  many  she  seems  called  of  God  to  this 
very  crisis,  and  they  would  not  see  her  yield  an  inch  of  hard 
won  ground  on  either  side  by  presenting  a  mere  partisan 
Episcopate  in  place  of  one  truly  historic  because  both 
Catholic  and  Protestant. 

Practical  Union  by  Ignoring  the  Question. 
We  have  thus  seen  that  it  would  only  hurt  the  cause  of 
church  unity  to  press  the  question  of  apostolic  succession. 
Add  now,  that  it  would  greatly  help  that  cause  and  harm  no 
other  interest,  to  leave  the  whole  question  open.  At  least,  to 
leave  it  open  between  Presbyterians  and  Episcopalians.  As 
to  that  question,  they  could  agree  to  differ  for  the  sake  of 
closer  oneness  in  essentials.  In  the  historic  episcopate,  as 
freed  from  that  question,  they  could  retain  severally  their  own 
view  of  the  ministry  and  sacraments,  and  at  the  same  time 
find  a  large  consensus  for  organic  reunion  throughout  Christ- 
endom. The  Catholic  Episcopalian  could  still  find  in  it  what 
he  finds  in  it  now,  a  ministration  of  that  apostolate  which  he 
believes  to  have  been  perpetuated  in  the  Greek,  Latin,  and 
Anglican  Churches  alone,  and  the  catholic  Presbyterian  could 
again  find  in  it  what  he  found  in  it  once,  a  complement  of  that 
presbyterate  which  he  believes  to  have  been  continued  in  the 
Lutheran,  Reformed,  and  Presbyterian  Churches,  as  well  as 
in  the  whole  Church  before  the  Reformation.  In  all  this 
there  would  be  nothing  strange  or  incongruous.  Such  a 
union  of  the  Episcopal  and  Presbyterial  orders  has  prevailed 


Gradual  Union.  187 

throughout  the  universal  Church  from  the  apostles'  time. 
Such  a  union  of  Presbyterians  with  Episcopalians  formerly- 
obtained  in  the  Church  of  England.  Such  a  union  of  Episco- 
palians with  Presbyterians  has  lately  been  proposed  for  the 
Church  of  Scotland.  And  something  like  such  a  union  may 
be  found  to-day  in  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the 
United  States. 

Only  Gradual  Union  Practicable, 
Here  let  it  be  emphasized  that  there  is  no  thought  of  one 
communion  absorbing  another.  Surely  nobody  is  foolish 
enough  to  dream  of  any  immediate  fusion  of  Christian  de- 
nominations  into  some  newly-organized  body  bursting  forth, 
like  the  flower  of  anight,  as  the  "  American  Catholic  Church." 
Nor  would  the  mere  melody  of  that  grand  title  ever  soothe 
them  into  oneness.  The  glorious  ideal  if  reached  at  all,  must 
be  approached  step  by  step,  with  prayers  and  tears,  through 
many  trials,  it  may  be,  and  after  much  mistake  and  failure. 
Doubtless  existing  church  organizations  will  long  continue 
with  their  standards  intact  and  their  autonomy  undisturbed. 
Organic  unity  could  only  supervene  upon  them,  or  slowly 
supersede  them,  as  discussions  give  rise  to  conferences,  and 
conferences  issue  in  leagues,  and  leagues  ripen  into  more  vital 
relations.  In  this  process  the  two  Churches  before  us  might 
lead  the  way  through  the  four  stages  proposed.  The  Holy 
Scriptures  could  be  recognized  at  once  as  their  common  foun- 
dation. The  Nicene  Creed  could  be  accepted  as  equally  con- 
sistent with  the  Articles  of  Religion  and  the  Confession  of 
Faith.  The  sacraments  of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper 
would  be  found  doctrinally  the  same  in  the  Prayer-book  and 
the  Directory.  And  the  Ordinal  and  the  Form  of  Govern- 
ment might  have  some  practical  agreement,  enough  at  least 
for  a  good  beginning. 

Meanwhile  it  is  of  the  utmost  importance  that  the  question 
of  Church  unity  should  be  kept  distinct  from  other  and  lesser 


1 88  The  Histo7nc  Presbyter  ate. 

questions.  It  does  not  turn  upon  denominational  tenets  or 
party  claims.  Neither  Presbyterians  nor  Episcopalians,  neither 
evangelical  nor  ritualistic  Churchmen  may  dictate  its  terms. 
If  Christian  sects  and  factions  cannot  sink  their  differences 
and  find  some  common  ground  of  mutual  tolerance  in  the 
same  Church  or  within  the  same  Church  system,  there  is  an 
end  to  everything  like  organic  oneness  as  distinguished  from 
mere  sentimental  fellowship. 

Accordingly,  the  proposed  terms  of  Church  unity  are  so 
stated  as  to  exclude  most  thoroughly  all  denominational  tenets 
and  partisan  opinions.  Even  the  denominational  tenets  of 
the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  are  largely  ignored,  as  well 
as  the  ecclesiastical  parties  within  its  pale.  The  Holy  Bible 
is  insisted  on,  but  not  the  Prayer  Book ;  the  Nicene  Creed, 
but  not  the  Thirty-nine  Articles ;  the  two  sacraments,  but 
neither  the  evangelical  nor  the  ritualistic  view  of  their 
efficacy ;  the  historic  episcopate,  but  neither  the  high  nor 
the  low  theory  of  its  prerogative.  In  like  manner,  the  Presby- 
terian Church  in  acceding  to  such  terms  could  not  insist  upon 
its  own  Directory  for  Worship  and  Confession  of  Faith,  nor 
dictate  any  special  views  of  ritual  and  polity.  The  two 
bodies,  while  adhering  to  the  same  Scriptures,  creeds,  sac- 
raments and  ministry,  would  still  have  a  wide  margin  for  their 
denominational  forms  of  doctrine  and  worship. 

These  distinctions  apply  with  special  force  to  the  last  of  the 
four  conditions.  The  historic  episcopate  if  defined  in  any 
particular  sense  by  Church  authority,  would  cease  at  once  to 
afford  a  ground  or  bond  of  unity.  Its  own  supporters  would 
rush  apart  into  schism.  According  to  the  definition  made, 
the  ministry  and  sacraments  would  either  be  declared  void  of 
all  that  they  meant  to  the  High  Church  party,  or  charged  with 
a  meaning  wholly  repudiated  by  the  Broad  Church  party. 
And  among  the  denominations  of  the  Church  at  large,  such  a 
doctrinal  definition  would  be  still  more  divisive,  repelling  them 
toward  the  extremes  of  Protestanism  and  Romanism.     It  is 


Pulpit  ExcJiaiiges.  189 

but  a  truism  to  say  that  the  right  and  left  wings  of  Christen- 
dom could  never  be  conjoined  in  an  episcopate  which  should 
take  sides  dogmatically  with  either  against  the  other. 

Pulpit  Exchanges. 

If  this  be  a  correct  view,  it  is  not  easy  to  see  how  true 
church  unity  would  be  promoted  by  interchanges  of  pulpit 
services  between  episcopal  and  non-episcopal  ministers. 
Sooner  or  later  such  interchanges  could  not  but  involve  a 
divisive  definition  of  the  Christian  ministry  itself.  For  a  time, 
indeed,  they  might  serve  some  good  ends.  Superficial  obser- 
vers might  rejoice  in  them  as  signs  of  Christian  fellowship 
and  clerical  amity.  In  some  worshiping  assemblies  they 
might  lead  to  effusive  manifestations  of  fraternal  feeling,  and 
on  charity  platforms  to  more  or  less  practical  co-operation. 
But  at  length  a  breach  would  be  opened  which  had  been 
concealed,  and  harsh  recoil  would  follow  the  hasty  union. 
When  the  black-gowned  preacher  in  the  pulpit  stood  con- 
trasted with  the  white-robed  priest  at  the  altar,  a  difference 
would  become  visible  to  their  respective  adherents  in  the 
pews — a  difference  as  absurd  as  irritating,  should  it  be  known 
that  the  priest  meant  to  recognize  the  validity  of  the  preacher's 
ministration,  while  the  preacher  claimed  to  have  the  presby- 
terial  functions  from  which  he  was  debarred.  Each  party 
would  be  put  in  a  false  position.  The  visiting  minister  would 
publicly  take  the  place  of  a  layman,  and  his  low  church 
brother  would  be  forced  to  appear  against  him  in  the  Abso- 
lution or  the  Communion,  though  both  held  substantially  the 
same  views  of  the  clerical  office  and  the  Holy  Supper.  Is  it 
not  to  be  feared  that  a  few  such  object  lessons  might  put  an 
end  to  every  hope  of  church  unity  in  the  pulpit  as  well  as  at 
the  altar? 

Let  it  be  observed  that  we  are  now  looking  at  this  question 
from  the  standpoint  of  church  unity  alone.  I  am  not  here 
maintaining  the  truth  or  falsity  of  any  doctrine  of  the  Chris- 
tian ministry,  nor  asking  others  to  take  high  or  low  church 


190  The  Historic  Presbyter  ate. 

ground  as  to  its  powers.  Indeed,  it  is  not  upon  such  ground 
merely  that  intelHgent  Episcopahans  may  be  supposed  to 
withhold  recognition  from  learned  divines  of  unimpeached 
orthodoxy  and  piety.  It  is  because  they  know  that  the  recog- 
nition would  draw  after  it  a  train  of  other  questions  involving 
at  length  the  unity  of  their  whole  church.  And  they  value 
such  unity  more  than  any  chance  fraternization  or  mere  vision- 
ary fellowship.  In  other  words,  the  historic  episcopate  holds 
them  together  in  the  essential  faith,  notwithstanding  their 
diverse  views  of  the  ministry  and  sacraments,  and  in  spite  of 
their  leanings  toward  either  extreme.  Now,  in  like  manner, 
it  mieht  draw  together  other  denominations  with  which  it  has 
more  or  less  affinity.  On  a  larger  scale  in  the  Christian  world 
it  might  embrace  the  same  schools  and  parties  which  are  now 
found  within  its  pale.  Its  expansive,  unifying  power  is  no 
mere  theory,  but  an  exemplary  fact.  All  this  power,  how- 
ever, it  would  lose  were  it  dragged  aside  to  any  partisan 
ground,  high  or  low,  evangelical  or  sacerdotal.  By  recogniz- 
ing faithful  ministers  or  preachers  not  episcopally  ordained, 
no  doubt  it  would  meet  many  noble  Christian  impulses  and 
please  some  sections  of  Protestantism,  but  it  would  alienate 
the  rest  of  Christendom,  as  well  as  rend  its  own  body  asunder. 
Whatever  else  it  might  retain,  it  would  forfeit  its  potential 
capacity  for  collecting  and  combining  the  scattered  ecclesias- 
tical elements  of  our  divided  American  Christianity.  For 
such  reasons  it  is  quite  conceivable  that  a  true  lover  of  church 
unity  might  deprecate  the  proposed  interchanges,  not  as 
undesirable  in  themselves,  but  as  likely  to  do  more  harm  than 
good  to  the  cause  which  he  had  at  heart.  He  might  think  a 
lasting  peace  better  than  any  hollow  truce,  and  be  disposed 
to  shun  mere  sentimental  compacts  for  the  sake  of  more 
intelligent  agreements.^ 


1  Another  view  of  this  question  has  been  clearly  and  forcibly  presented  by 
Prof.  John  DeWitt,  of  rrinceton  Theological  Seminary,  in  a  letter  to  the  Rev. 
Dr.  S.  D.  McConnell,  published  by  the  Church  Unity  Society  of  Philadelphia. 


Presbyteria7i  Orders.  191 

Unity  is  a  plant  of  slow  growth.  It  cannot  be  forced.  It 
will  require  time  and  thought  and  study,  as  well  as  prayer 
and  effort.  The  present  race  of  clergymen  may  have  to  pass 
away.  Another  generation  may  need  to  be  educated  to  a 
higher  point  of  view.  In  future  ordinations  which  cast  no 
seeming  reflection  upon  a  former  ministry,  or  which  may 
involve  some  more  practical  legitimation  of  Presbyterian 
ministrations,  a  degree  of  essential  unity  may  be  reached 
before  which  the  freest  interchange  of  pulpit  services  would 
sink  into  insignificance. 

Presbyterian  Orders. 

What  is  true  of  pulpit  exchanges  is  true  of  the  whole 
question  of  Presbyterian  orders  ?  Important  as  that  question 
may  be,  it  is  as  yet  irrelevant  and  premature.  As  a  matter 
of  personal  duty,  it  might  have  much  significance,  for  a 
Presbyterian  minister  seeking  admission  to  Holy  Orders  in 
the  Episcopal  Church;  but  as  a  question  of  ecclesiastical 
policy  between  the  Presbyterian  and  Episcopal  Churches,  it 
is  the  very  last  one  to  be  raised  in  any  formal  conference  or 
negotiation.  Were  the  two  churches  already  agreed  on  the 
Lambeth  basis  in  accepting  the  historic  episcopate  as  a  bond 
of  re-union  or  unification,  the  question  would  then  be  both 
timely  and  hopeful,  and  might  almost  settle  itself  with  but 
little  discussion.  Only  in  view  of  such  an  event  is  it  worth 
while  to  consider  it,  and  only  in  that  vievv^  do  I  now  propose 
briefly  to  present  it. 

It  should  be  observed,  at  the  outset,  that  the  question  has 
become  a  very  simple  one  as  transferred  from  the  old  to  the 
new  world,  amid  the  changed  circumstances  of  the  two 
churches  in  this  country.  It  is  no  longer  complicated  with 
the  political  institutions  which  made  both  Episcopacy  and 
Presbytery  monarchical  and  aristocratic  in  their  associations. 
It  is  no  longer  complicated  with  the  needs  of  a  State  religion, 
which  made  the  church  of  England  Episcopalian,  and  the 
church  of  Scotland  Presbyterian,  before  the  union  of  the  two 


192  The  Historic  Presbyter  ate. 

kingdoms.  It  is  no  longer  complicated  with  the  racial  influences 
which  through  successive  generations  made  Presbytery  dis- 
tinctively Scottish  and  Episcopacy  as  distinctively  Anglican. 
It  is  not  even  complicated  with  the  difficulties  which  beset  it 
during  the  colonial  period  of  our  own  history,  when  Presby- 
terians, in  common  with  Puritans,  opposed  the  intrusion,  not 
of  the  episcopate  itself,  but  of  its  civil  establishment  over  the 
colonies  with  all  the  evils  of  British  taxation  and  patronage. 
"We  hope  in  God,"  wrote  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts 
to  their  London  agent,  "  such  an  establishment  will  never  take 
place  in  America,  and  we  desire  you  would  strenuously 
oppose  it."  "  We  would  by  no  means  have  it  understood," 
gravely  declared  the  Synods  of  New  York  and  Philadelphia, 
"that  we  would  endeavor  to  prevent  an  American  bishop,  or 
archbishop,  or  patriarch,  or  whatever  else  they  might  see  fit 
to  send,  provided  other  denominations  could  be  safe  from 
their  severity  and  encroachments."  ^  The  Episcopal  churches 
themselves  joined  in  opposing  the  project.  The  Virginia 
clergy,  with  only  eight  exceptions  out  of  a  hundred,  resisted 
it;  and  the  House  of  Burgesses  unanimously  thanked  the 
protesters  "for  the  wise  and  well-timed  opposition  they  had 
made  to  the  pernicious  project  of  a  few  clergymen  for  intro- 
ducing an  American  bishop."^  After  the  Revolution,  when 
all  danger  of  any  State  religion  was  gone,  the  episcopate, 
pure  and  simple,  was  procured,  and  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  took  its  place  among  sister  churches  without  opposi- 
tion or  even  criticism.  "  As  far  as  the  Presbyterian  Church 
is  concerned,"  says  Dr.  Hodge,  "  we  should  be  sorry  that  it 
should  lie  under  the  imputation  of  having  resisted  the  reason- 
able wishes  of  another  denomination  to  the  enjoyment  of 
their  own  ecclesiastical  system."  The  whole  question  of 
Presbyterian  orders  has  thus  become  divested  of  foreign 
issues :    and    it    is    a    mistake   to    be    ever  injecting    into    it 

1  Dr.  Hodge's  Constitutional  History  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  p.  372. 
*  Dr.  Hawks'    Ecclesiastical  History  of  the   United  States,  Vol.  i,  p.  127. 


Presbyterian  Orders.  193 

the  old  feuds  of  Cavalier  and  Covenanter,  Churchman  and 
Dissenter,  Whig  and  Tory,  after  a  century  of  friendly  inter- 
course. 

It  should  also  be  borne  in  mind  that  both  churches  hold 
substantially  the  same  theory  of  holy  orders,  the  one  attach- 
ing it  to  presbytery  and  the  other  to  episcopacy.  Practically 
at  least,  Presbyterians,  no  less  than  Episcopalians,  maintain 
the  Christian  ministry  as  a  divine  institution,  conveying  divine 
authority  and  apostolical  doctrine  and  piety,  all  in  fact  that  is 
transmissible  from  the  apostles,  by  means  of  regular  ordina- 
tions in  a  succession  presbyterial  rather  than  merely  prelatical. 
"  So  far  as  apostolical  succession  can  be  verified,"  says  Dr. 
Alexander,  "the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States 
possesses  it,  as  really  and  fully  as  the  Church  of  England. 
In  making  this  assertion  we  assume  as  proved  already,  that  a 
superior  order  in  the  ministry  to  that  of  presbyters  is  not 
essential  to  the  being  of  the  church,  but  that  from  the  begin- 
ning presbyters  have  exercised  the  highest  powers  now  belong- 
ing to  the  ministry.  If  so,  it  is  through  them  that  the  apos- 
tolic succession  must  be  traced,  and  we  accordingly  maintain 
that  our  orders  may  be  just  as  surely  traced  in  this  way  up  to 
apostolic  times  as  those  of  any  other  church  through  bishops. 
The  denial  of  this  fact  has,  for  the  most  part,  been  con- 
nected with  the  false  assumption  that  the  ministry  of  our 
church  has  been  derived  from  that  of  Geneva,  and  depends 
for  its  validity  upon  the  authority  of  Calvin  ;  whereas  we  trace 
our  orders,  through  the  original  Presbytery  of  Philadelphia, 
to  the  mother-church  of  Scotland,  which  is  well-known  to 
have  been  reformed  with  the  concurrence  and  assistance  of 
men  regularly  ordained  in  the  Church  of  Rome.  The  princi- 
pal admixture  of  this  Scottish  element,  in  our  earliest 
presbyteries,  was  with  New  England  Puritans,  among  whom 
only  two  examples  of  lay-ordination  are  believed  to  have 
occurred,  and  whose  ecclesiastical  system  was  originally 
founded  by  regularly  ordained  priests  of  the  Anglican  establish- 


194  "^^^^  Historic  P^'esbyterate, 

ment."  ^  The  point  to  be  emphasized  in  this  reasoning  is,  that 
it  clearly  puts  the  question  before  us  as  not  so  much  a  differ- 
ence in  doctrine  as  in  polity,  and  almost  reduces  it  to  a  matter 
of  ecclesiastical  policy. 

Even  as  to  this  mere  ecclesiastical  question,  it  is  well  to 
remember  that  both  sides  have  long  since  made  admissions 
and  advances  by  which  they  have  met  midway  and  all  but 
exchanged  positions.  On  the  one  hand,  the  highest  Episcopal 
authorities  have  repeatedly  recognized  the  validity  of  Presby- 
terian orders.  During  the  first  century  after  the  Reformation, 
as  it  is  well  known,  foreign  divines  such  as  Bucer,  Laski,  and 
Peter  Martyr,  who  had  only  presbyterial  ordination,  were 
admitted  to  benefices  in  the  Church  of  England,  and  on  the 
invitation  of  Cranmer  assisted  in  framing  the  articles  and 
liturgy.  Knox  also  officiated  in  English  parishes  and  himself 
wrote  the  "  Black  Rubric  "  against  transubstantiation  in  the 
Communion  office.  It  is  useless  to  argue  that  the  orders  of 
such  men  were  not  recognized.  They  were  legalized  by  Act  of 
Parliament  (Eliz.,  1571),  and  the  Primate,  Archbishop  Grindal, 
applied  the  act,  not  to  Roman  priests  only,  but  to  Presbyterian 
clergymen,  as  for  example,  in  the  typical  case  of  Morrison, 
described  in  his  licensure  as  "  called  to  the  ministry  by  the 
imposition  of  hands  according  to  the  laudable  form  and  rite  of 
the  Reformed  Church  of  Scotland.  And  since  the  congrega- 
tion of  the  county  of  Lothian  is  conformable  to  the  orthodox 
faith  and  sincere  religion  now  received  in  the  realm  of  England, 
we,  therefore,  approving  and  ratifying  the  form  of  your  ordi- 
nation and  preferment,  grant  you  a  license  and  faculty  in  such 
orders  by  you  taken.  You  may  and  have  power  to  celebrate 
the  divine  offices,  to  minister  the  sacraments,  etc."^  Travers 
pleaded  the  same  statute  successfully  in  maintenance  of  Dutch 


1  "  Primitive  Church  Offices,"  p.  177.   By  Prof.  J.  Addison  Alexander,  Prince- 
ton  Theological  Seminary. 

2"  History  of  Presbyterians  in  England,"  p.   132.     Rev.  J.   H.    Drysdale, 
London. 


Presbyterian  Orders.  195 

as  well  as  Scotch  Presbyterian  ordination.  The  greatest 
names  in  the  English  Church  might  be  cited  to  the  same 
effect.  "There  may  be  sometimes,"  said  the  judicious 
Hooker,  "  very  good  and  sufficient  reason  to  allow  ordination 
made  without  a  bishop."^  It  was  admitted  by  Bishop  Hall, 
of  the  divine  right  school,  that  many  such  ministers  were 
in  holy  orders  without  exceptions  against  the  lawfulness 
of  their  calling.  "The  peerless  prelate,"  Andrews,  declared 
that  a  man  must  be  blind  who  does  not  see  churches  standinsf 
without  episcopacy.  "  I  love  not  herein,"  said  the  devout 
Bishop  Cosin  "  to  be  more  wise  or  harder  than  our  own 
church  is,  which  has  never  publicly  condemned  and  pro- 
nounced the  ordination  of  the  other  Reformed  Churches  to 
be  void."'^  Such  authorities  and  precedents  were  openly  plead 
by  the  Presbyterian  clergy  at  the  Restoration,  in  their  protest 
against  re-ordination  :  "  When,"  said  they,  "  a  canon  amongst 
those  called  the  Apostles',  deposeth  those  that  re-ordain  and 
that  are  re-ordained ;  when  it  is  a  thing  that  both  Papists  and 
Protestants  condemn  ;  and  when  not  only  the  former  bishops 
of  England  that  were  more  moderate,  were  against  it,  but  even 
the  most  fervent  adversaries  of  the  Presbyterian  way,  such  as 
Bishop  Bancroft  himself,  how  strange  must  it  needs  seem  to  the 
reformed  churches,  to  the  whole  Christian  world,  and  to  future 
generations,  that  so  many  able,  faithful  ministers  should  be  laid 
by  as  broken  vessels,  because  they  dare  not  be  re-ordained."^ 
It  was  only  by  the  triumph  of  the  high  prelatic  party  in  the 
Act  of  Uniformity  that  Presbyterian  orders  were  for  the  first 
time  made  unlawful  and  Presbyterianism  itself  thenceforth 
extinguished  in  the  Church  of  England,  But  though 
extinguished  there,  it  re-appeared  on  this  side  of  the  Atlantic 
with  undiminished  vigor,  after  our  Revolution,  when  the 
patriot-bishop  White,    dismissing  the   resort   to    a    Swedish 

^  Ecclesiastical  Polity,  B.  vii,  chap.  xlv. 

2  Anglo-Catholic  Library,  Vol.  iv,  p.  403. 

3  Documents  relating  to  Act  of  Uniformity,  p.  1S6. 


196  The  Historic  Presbyterate. 

episcopate  as  ludicrous,  and  contenting  himself  with  a  general 
approbation  of  the  English  episcopate,  if  it  could  be  had,  pro- 
ceeded to  give  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  that  presby- 
terial  constitution  which  it  now  has  in  common  with  the 
Presbyterian  Church  and  in  distinction  from  the  mother 
Church  of  England. 

Candid  churchmen  of  the  strictest  school,  admit  all  these 
facts,  and  while  favoring  no  abatement  of  existing  canons, 
generously  allow  good  standing  to  other  churchmen,  who 
view  the  episcopate  as  a  development  or  complement  of  the 
presbyterate.  "  That  it  is  not  competent  for  one  in  Holy 
Orders  to  hold  and  affirm  such  views,"  says  the  Bishop  of 
New  York,  "can  only  be  alleged  by  one  who  is  grossly 
ignorant,  whether  of  the  history  of  the  Church  of  England  or 
of  our  own,  or  deliberately  determined  to  misrepresent  both."  ^ 
With  the  same  comprehensive  view  the  Bishop  of  Western 
New  York,  in  a  public  letter  with  which  he  has  honored  the 
writer,  almost  identifies  English  Presbyterianism  with  Ameri- 
can Episcopacy  on  the  basis  of  the  Lambeth  proposals: 
"  With  entire  consistency  therefore  the  Presbyterian  position 
might  be  thus  stated  in  answer  to  our  proposals,  viz.:  '  We 
affirm  (i)  that  no  bishop  has  a  right  to  ordain  a  presbyter 
without  the  consent  of  presbytery  and  the  conjoint  imposition 
of  their  hands;  and  (2)  that  the  concurrence  of  presbyters  and 
laymen  in  synodical  sessions  and  consistories  is  requisite  to 
the  rightful  exercise  of  episcopal  government,' — which  is  our 
doctrine  confirmed  by  the  teaching  of  St.  Cyprian,  and  as  we 
suppose  the  teaching  of  Holy  Scripture  itself."^  There  has 
thus  been  a  catena  of  Episcopal  authorities  from  the  beginning 
favoring  in  some  form  or  degree  the  claims  of  presbytery. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  well  also  to  remember  that  the 


1  Third  Triennial  Charge  to  the  Convention  by  the  Right  Rev.  Henry  Cod- 
man  Potter,  D.  D.,  LL.D. 

2  "  Second  Letter  to  the  Rev.  Dr.  Shields,"  from  the  Right  Rev.  A.  C.  Coxe, 
LL.  D. 


Presbyterian  Orders.  197 

highest  Presbyterian   authorities  have  often  recognized  the 
legitimacy  and  even  desirableness  of  a  pure  Episcopacy.     The 
reformers,  with  scarcely  an  exception,  not  only  held  such  an 
episcopacy  to  be  scriptural,  but  lamented  the  political  cir- 
cumstances which  prevented  them  from  reforming  and  con- 
tinuing the  existing  historic  episcopate.     Calvin,  in  delineat- 
ing the  primitive  Church,  says  that  "  in  each  city  the  presbyters 
selected  one  of  their  number  to  whom  they  gave  the  special 
title  of  bishop,  lest,  as  usually  happens,  from  equality  dis- 
sension should  arise.^ "    And  so  far  from  thinking  it  necessary 
in  reforming  the  Church  to  destroy  even  the  Roman  epis- 
copate, he  grows  indignant  at  the  thought,  if  it  could  only  be 
freed  from  papal  corruptions  and  restored  to  primitive  purity  : 
"  Let  them  show  us  such  a  hierarchy  that  therein  bishops  should 
so  preside  as  not  refusing  subjection  to  Christ,  but  from  Him 
as  their  only  Head  should  be  derived  and  to  Him  should  be 
related  ;  in  which  their  brotherly  fellowship  with  one  another 
should  be  so  disposed  that  by  no  other  bond  than  that  of  His 
truth  they  should  be  allied ;  then  verily  I  must  allow  that 
there  is  no  anathema  of  which  they  would  not  be  worthy,  if 
any  such  should  be,  who  would  not  reverently  and  with  con- 
summate obedience  yield  them  recognition."^   In  the  Reformed 
Kirk,  from  the  time  of  Knox,  for  the  first  hundred  years,  there 
was  a  species  of  episcopacy  or  superintendency,  and  the  Confes- 
sion, in  distinct  terms,  long  required  the  induction  of  Church 
of  England  clergymen,  if  sound  in  doctrine,  without  re-ordi- 
nation.   The  English  Presbyterians,  from  Cartwright  to  Baxter, 
did  not  so  much  oppose  episcopacy  as  the  hierarchical  corrup- 
tions with  which  it  had  become  overlaid,  especially  the  suppres- 
sion of  the  powers  of  presbytery.     Their  views  were  fairly  set 
forth  in  Archbishop  Ussher's  famous  Reduction  of  Episcopacy 
unto  the  form  of  Synodical  government  in  the  Ancient  Church." 


1  Institutes,  Book  iv,  Chap.  4. 

2  De  Necessitate  Reformandne  Ecclesise,  Edinburgh  Trans.,  Vol.  i,  p.  217. 
'  Ussher's  Model  of  Church  Government,  Documents,  p.  22. 


198  The  Historic  Pi^esbyterate. 

At  the  Restoration  in  166 1  the  EngUsh  Presbyterian  clergy, 
many  of  whom  had  sat  in  the  Westminster  Assembly,  them- 
selves proposed  this  pure  episcopacy,  in  the  following  terms: 
"Although  upon  just  reason  we  do  dissent  from  that  ec- 
clesiastical hierarchy  or  prelacy,  disclaimed  in  the  Covenant, 
as  it  was  stated  and  exercised  in  these  kingdoms,  yet  we  do 
not  nor  ever  did  renounce  the  true  ancient  primitive  episco- 
pacy or  presidency  as  it  was  balanced  and  managed  by  a  due 
commixtion  of  presbyters  therewith,  as  a  fit  means  to  avoid 
corruptions,  partiality,  tyranny  and  other  evils  which  may  be 
incident  to  the  administration  of  one  single  person.^ "  It  is 
interesting  to  notice,  among  the  reasons  which  they  give  for 
such  episcopacy  are  those  which  now  animate  the  American 
Bishops  in  their  proposals ;  "  First.  We  have  reason  to  be- 
lieve that  no  other  terms  will  be  so  generally  agreed  on,  and 
it  is  no  way  injurious  to  episcopal  power.  Second.  It  being 
agreeable  to  Scripture  and  the  primitive  government,  is 
likeliest  to  be  the  way  of  a  more  universal  concord,  if  ever  the 
Churches  on  earth  arrive  at  such  a  blessing."^  This  is  more 
than  a  coincidence.  There  is  even  something  prophetic,  as 
well  as  pathetic,  in  the  voice  which  thus  comes  to  us  across 
the  centuries  at  this  juncture : — 

"  And  here  we  leave  it  to  the  notice  and  observation  of 
posterity,  how  little  the  English  bishops  had  to  say  against 
the  form  of  primitive  episcopacy  contained  in  Archbishop 
Ussher's  Reduction,  in  the  day  v/hen  they  rather  choose  the 
increase  of  our  divisions,  the  silencing  of  many  hundred  faith- 
ful ministers,  the  scattering  of  the  flocks,  the  afflicting  of  so 
many  thousand  godly  Christians,  than  the  accepting  of  this 
primitive  episcopacy;  which  was  the  expedient  which  those 
called  Presbyterians  offered,  never  once  speaking  for  the  cause 
of  presbytery."^ 

Why  recall  this  sad  argument?     Surely  not  to  fight  the 

^  Documents  relating  to  Act  of  Uniformity,  p.  15. 

2  Documents,  p.  50.  ^  Documents,  p.  82. 


Mutual  Recognition.  199 

battle  over  again.  Not  to  renew  the  plea  of  presbytery  or 
the  claim  of  prelacy;  but  simply  to  show  how  much  common 
ground  Episcopalians  and  Presbyterians  have  gained  since 
they  parted  company  two  hundred  years  ago,  and  how  litlle 
ground  of  difference  would  remain  were  the  Lambeth  basis 
adopted.  In  fact,  even  that  remaining  ground  disappears 
between  them.  By  their  own  mutual  concessions  and  ap- 
proaches they  are  already  virtually  committed  to  the  Quadri- 
lateral. The  mere  logical  battle  for  church  unity  is  won.  It 
may  be  long  before  it  is  followed  by  the  logic  of  events. 
Doubtless,  the  wretched  wrangle  will  go  on  among  us  for 
some  time  to  come,  like  the  guerrilla  warfare  of  men  who 
know  not  that  a  treaty  of  peace  has  been  signed ;  but  it  can- 
not go  on  forever.     The  issue  is  only  a  question  of  time. 

In  a  word,  were  the  Presbyterian  and  Episcopal  Churches 
now  formally,  as  they  are  historically  and  doctrinally,  agreed 
upon  the  Lambeth  basis,  the  vexed  question  of  orders  would 
at  once  sink  between  them  into  a  mere  provisional  matter,  to 
be  treated  as  an  anomaly  or  exception  incident  to  the  practi- 
cal process  of  unification.  In  view  of  such  an  event  several 
modes  of  settling  the  question  present  themselves.  We  need 
not  stop  to  consider  it  as  it  figures  in  the  popular  caricature 
of  twelve  thousand  Presbyterian  ministers  going  straightway 
to  the  Bishops  for  re-ordination.  Instead  of  looking  for  so 
catastrophic  a  millennium,  let  us  approach  the  problem  more 
quietly,  with  caution  and  circumspection.  It  may  be  found 
that  within  the  Quadrilateral,  as  affording  mutually  accepted 
bounds  of  church  unity,  ecclesiastical  correspondence  between 
the  two  communions  might  begin  and  proceed  through  three 
stages:  Mutual  recognition;  hypothetical  ordination;  and 
concurrent  ordination  and  jurisdiction. 

Mutual  Recognition. 

The  Episcopal  recognition  or  authorization  of  Presbyterian 
ministers,  as  it  may  become  desirable  and  practicable  within 
the  prescribed  church  limits,  would  be  no  novel  measure.    To 


200  The  Historic  Presbyterate. 

say  nothing  of  ancient  precedents  and  analogies,  it  was  long 
practiced,  as  we  have  seen,  in  the  early  churches  of  England 
and  Scotland.  In  1661  it  was  definitely  proposed  by  Arch- 
bishop Leighton  of  Glascow,  for  the  comprehension  of  Pres- 
byterians with  Episcopalians  in  the  Scottish  church  when 
prelacy  was  enforced  by  Charles  II ;  but  the  rancor  of  the 
times  showed  it  no  favor,  and  the  saintly  prelate  retired  from 
his  see,  it  is  said,  to  die  broken-hearted  at  the  failure  of  his 
scheme.  Quite  recently  the  proposition  has  been  renewed 
for  the  comprehension  of  Episcopalians  with  Presbyterians  in 
the  existing  church  establishment,  by  the  late  Bishop  Words- 
worth of  St.  Andrews,  who  advocated  it  at  the  last  Lambeth 
Conference.  His  suggestion  was  to  recognize  the  full  stand- 
ing of  Presbyterian  ministers  on  condition  that  bishops  and 
presbyters  be  united  in  all  future  ordinations.  Assuming 
Episcopal  ordination  to  be  a  rule  within  the  Anglican  com- 
munion alone,  which  casts  no  reflection  upon  other  ministries, 
the  Bishop  says  :  "  A  rule  if  applied  without  exception,  may 
defeat  its  own  end.  Accordingly  it  has  been  felt  by  the 
greatest  divines  whom  God  has  ever  raised  up  within  His 
church,  such  as  St.  Augustine  and  Hooker,  that  the  rule  of 
ordination,  if  it  were  enforced  without  suspension  or  relaxa- 
tion in  all  circumstances,  so  far  from  tending  to  maintain 
unity,  must  serve  to  render  unity  impossible."  The  proposi- 
tion is  understood  to  have  been  carefully  considered  by  the 
Committee  of  the  Conference  and  even  attracted  the  com- 
mendation of  the  Primate  himself.  It  has  also  been  favorably 
noticed  by  several  bishops  and  learned  clergymen  on  this  side 
of  the  water. 

The  question,  as  it  may  emerge  between  the  two  corres- 
ponding churches  in  our  own  country,  is  happily  free  from 
the  embarrassment  of  a  state  religion  and  from  some  social 
influences  which  are  of  a  divisive  tendency.  Its  settlement 
is  favored  by  their  new  political  condition  and  their  more 
homogeneous  structure  and  culture.  But  unfortunately,  at 
the  present  time,  it  is  held  in  suspense  by  the  arrest  put  upon 


Mutual  Recog7iition.  201 

the  deliberations  of  the  Episcopal  and  Presbyterian  Com- 
missions on  church  unity  by  the  last  General  Assembly. 
Friendly  discussion  would  seem  to  have  been  shut  off  at  the 
point  where  alone  it  might  begin.  To  stipulate,  in  any  eccle- 
siastical sense,  for  "  the  doctrine  of  mutual  recognition  and 
reciprocity  "  as  a  condition  precedent  to  even  entertaining  the 
Episcopal  proposals  is  simply  meeting  large  concessions  with 
a  demand  for  larger,  and  begging  the  very  question  in  dis- 
pute. It  remains  to  be  proved  whether  on  the  basis  of  the 
historic  episcopate,  as  properly  understood,  the  fullest  mutual 
recognition  and  reciprocity  might  not  be  found  as  feasible  as 
it  is  desirable.  The  commissioners  were  feeling  their  way 
toward  such  results,  however  distant  as  yet,  and  had  made 
good  progress  when  their  brotherly  conferences  were  inter- 
rupted. The  leaders  on  both  sides  take  this  view  of  their 
commission.  Dr.  Joseph  T.  Smith  tells  us  that  the  two 
"  Committees  were  required  in  express  terms  to  proceed  on 
*  the  basis  of  a  common  faith  and  order.'  They  were  to  in- 
quire, first  of  all,  as  to  their  agreements,  and  ascertain  how 
far  and  in  what  particulars  they  were  at  one.  Their  differ- 
ences were  to  beheld  in  abeyance  until  the  preliminary  ques- 
tion was  settled,  whether  there  was  any  such  'common  faith  and 
order  '  as  would  furnish  a  basis  for  closer  relations."  ^  Bishop 
Coxe  also  says  emphatically :  "  I  should  never  have  con- 
sented to  be  one  of  the  commission  for  brotherly  conference 
with  a  like  committee  of  the  General  Assembly,  had  I  not 
supposed  that  mutual  acquaintance  and  the  eradication  of 
long  estrangements  and  feuds  which  have  been  the  bane  of 
our  intercourse  for  centuries  would  naturally  promote  impor- 
tant results.  ...  To  reach  the  tcnnimis  ad  qucm  by  making 
it  the  starting  point,  instead  of  the  goal,  appears  to  me  a 
hystcron  proteron,  illogical  and  involving  impossibilities."" 
What  makes  the  momentary  breach  the  more  unfortunate  is 

1  The  New  York  Evanglist,  May  lo,  1894. 

2  Letter  to  Rev.  Dr.  Shields,  in  the  Churchman,  September  29,  1S94. 


202  The  Historic  Presbyterate. 

the  fact  that  it  was  not  caused  by  any  real  change  of  opinion 
in  the  two  churches,  much  less  in  the  two  committees,  but 
by  outside  parties  forcing  into  the  negotiation  a  wild  issue 
with  which  it  had  nothing  whatever  to  do,  that  of  an  indis- 
criminate exchange  of  pulpits  with  all  denominations,  good, 
bad,  and  indifferent.  It  is  not  probable  that  two  great  eccle- 
siastical bodies,  so  intelligent  and  self-respecting,  will  allow  a 
misunderstanding  brought  about  by  such  influences,  to  con- 
tinue after  the  mists  which  have  obscured  the  situation  have 
passed  away. 

Without  speculating  as  to  the  future  course  of  opinion  in 
this  matter,  I  can  only  state  in  a  word  or  two  the  general 
argument  for  mutual  recognition  as  attainable  on  the  Lam- 
beth basis.  As  Presbyterians  have  always  recognized  the 
validity  of  Episcopal  orders,  it  is  natural  that  they  should 
desire  it  to  be  mutual  for  the  sake  of  both  parties.  It  would 
seem  that  among  non-episcopal  denominations  a  discrimina- 
tion misht  be  made  in  favor  of  a  church  which  historically 
and  doctrinally  is  already  in  so  full  accoi'd  with  the  Episcopal 
Church,  especially  in  regard  to  the  ministry  and  sacraments 
and  other  ecclesiastical  questions.  It  should  be  remembered 
that  Presbyterian  ordination  was  made  unlawful  only  by  the 
civil  authority  of  a  state-religion ;  that  it  has  never  been  pro- 
nounced invalid  by  any  purely  ecclesiastical  authority,  though 
always  deemed  irregular;  and  that  its  validity  in  mitigating 
circumstances  has  often  been  recognized  by  the  most  illus- 
trious prelates  and  divines  of  every  school  of  churchmanship. 
Add  to  this,  that  the  acceptance  of  the  Lambeth  articles  even 
provisionally,  would  remove  traditional  prejudices  and  former 
causes  of  difference.  Finally,  it  would  be  an  act  of  magnani- 
mous reparation  for  a  great  public  wrong,  which  some  histo- 
rians have  likened  to  a  second  St.  Bartholemew,  and  all  have 
lamented  as  a  calamity,  to  restore  relations  of  ecclesiastical 
comity  in  this  land  and  age  of  greater  light  and  freedom 
and  at  this  distance  from  the  scene  of  the  original  conflict. 

A  generous  admirer  of  the  Episcopal   Church,  who  was 


Mutual  Recognition.  203 

not  less  a  thoroughgoing  Presbyterian,  the  late  Dr.  Van- 
dyke, has  said :  "  If  the  Episcopal  Church  could  come  back 
to  the  spirit  and  practice  of  her  earlier  and  in  this  respect  her 
better  days,  and  acknowledge  non-episcopal  ordination  as 
valid,  though  in  her  judgment  irregular,  this  would  put  us 
upon  an  equal  footing.  Zealous  Episcopalians  will  probably 
resent  the  bare  suggestion  of  such  a  concession  on  their  part. 
Some,  like  Dr.  Blunt,  will  look  upon  it  as  a  renewed  attempt 
of  foreign  Protestantism  to  bring  them  down  to  the  same 
abject  level.  But  vehement  protests,  though  they  express 
the  sincere  conviction  and  desire  of  individuals,  are  not 
always  the  prophecies  of  what  great  bodies  of  people  will  do. 
Extreme  opinions  are  never  the  most  stable.  Stranger 
changes  than  the  one  suggested  have  swept  over  even  the 
Episcopal  Church."^  While  it  has  proved  true  that  this 
suggestion  has  been  resented  by  some  Episcopalians,  yet 
many  others  are  now  showing  themselves  ready  not,  indeed, 
to  formally  recognize  the  validity  of  Presbyterian  ordination, 
but  to  secure  all  the  substantial  advantages  of  such  a  recog- 
nition so  far  as  it  can  be  done  consistently  with  rubrics, 
canons,  precedents  and  usages.  And  in  seeking  this  result 
there  need  be  no  sweeping  changes  of  a  revolutionary  na- 
ture, but  only  the  successive  steps  of  an  orderly  progress. 
This  at  least  is  the  conservative  view  of  the  Bishop  of  Long 
Island,  who  is  known  to  have  been  the  author  of  the  Chicago 
Declaration  and  may  decisively  speak  of  the  motives  and 
hopes  which  animated  it.  After  noticing  favorably  the 
Episcopal  and  Presbyterian  Conference  at  Baltimore,  he  says,^ 
"  On  the  other  hand,  I  cannot  but  think  it  was  wise  in  the 
House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  not  to  consent,  under 
existing  circumstances,  to  the  incorporation  into  our  organic 
law  of  the  principles  which  we  have  set  forth  as  the  basis  of 

^  "The  Church,  Her  Ministry  and  Sacraments,"  p.    159.     By  Rev.  Henry  J. 
Vandyke,  D.  D. 

2  Annual  Address  to  the  Clergy.    By  the  Right  Rev.  A.  N.  Littlejohn,  I.L.D. 


204  The  HistoiHc  Presbyter  ate. 

any  possible  unification  of  the  sundered  Communions  of 
Christendom,  Had  such  incorporation  been  authorized,  the 
whole  body  of  our  canons  would  have  required  immediate 
adjustment  to  it.  For  one,  I  believe  this  would  be  too  radical 
a  step  to  take  in  view  of  the  very  slight  favor  that  has,  as  yet, 
been  shown  by  other  bodies  toward  the  very  liberal  overtures 
we  have  already  made.  What  we  have  done  has  answered 
the  very  important  purpose  of  exciting  widespread  and 
earnest  discussion  of  the  whole  subject.  This  is  all  that  can 
be  safely  or  wisely  done  at  this  time.  In  one  way  or  another 
the  discussion  will  go  on,  now  that  it  has  been  begun,  until  it 
shall  produce  some  practical  fruit." 

The  first  practical  step  in  an  orderly  progress  has  already 
been  taken  by  the  appointment  of  an  Ecclesiastical  Commis- 
sion, representing  the  learning,  wisdom,  and  piety  of  the  two 
churches.  Should  its  conferences  be  continued,  it  could  lay 
the  foundations  on  both  sides  of  a  connecting  arch  destined 
to  find  its  keystone  in  the  episcopate.  It  might  even  span 
the  gulf  with  an  airy  outline  or  temporary  framework  of  pro- 
visional agreements  and  arrangements  in  the  building  process 
of  unity.  One  of  these  might  be  a  sanctioned  interchange  of 
sermons  between  Episcopal  and  Presbyterian  preachers  of  the 
two  communions,  understood  to  be  agreed  in  accepting  the 
four  Lambeth  conditions  of  good  church  standing.  This 
would  put  the  vexed  matter  of  pulpit  exchange,  otherwise 
quite  insignificant,  on  a  basis  of  ecclesiastical  principles,  and 
would  protect  it  from  the  evils  of  an  indiscriminate  and  un- 
authorized practice.^  By  such  a  step  neither  party  would  or 
could  have  conceded  anything  whatever.     The  ministry  of  the 


1  The  guarded  proposal  of  the  Presbyterian  Committee  was  in  the  following 

terms  : "  We  recognize  the  right  and  duty  of  each  Church  to  protect  its  pulpits 

from  the  intrusion  of  all  unauthorized  or  self-appointed  preachers  of  the  Word, 
and  to  take  such  measures  as  shall  best  secure  the  teaching  of  sound  doctrine. 
Also  this  custom,  if  established  between  us,  should  not  be  in  unregulated  liberty, 
but  under  such  rules  and  limitations  as  the  episcopal  authority  of  both  bodies 
may  agree  upon."— Dr.  Joseph  T.  Smith,  in  The  Evangelist,  May  lo,  1894. 


Hypothetical  Ordination.  205 

Word  is  separable  from  that  of  the  sacraments,  as  may  be  seen 
in  the  Presbyterian  licentiate  and  the  Episcopalian  deacon, 
neither  of  whom  has  the  latter  function.  Were  it  proposed  to 
take  a  step  farther  in  the  mutual  recognition,  the  path  would 
become  thorny  with  perplexities.  At  the  start  would  appear 
the  obvious  inconvenience  that  Presbyterian  ministers  are  no 
more  fitted  to  officiate  in  liturgical  offices  without  the  training 
of  the  diaconate  than  an  Episcopal  clergyman  to  conduct  ex- 
tempore services  without  long  familiarity  with  spontaneous 
worship.  Against  this  difficulty  it  might  justly  be  urged, 
that  the  third  Lambeth  article  does  not  require  the  use  of  the 
Prayer-book,  at  least  not  as  a  condition  of  church  comity,  and 
Episcopal  and  Presbyterian  ministers  might  unite  in  other 
Reformed  liturgies  or  directories  which  ensure  the  unfail- 
ing use  of  the  validating  words  and  elements  appointed  by 
our  Lord.  Even  then,  however,  it  would  still  be  objected, 
that  the  fourth  Lambeth  article,  as  connected  with  the  third 
article,  would  seem  to  make  the  efficacy  or  validity  of  such 
ministrations  depend  upon  Episcopal  as  distinguished  from 
Presbyterial  ordination,  and  the  conflicting  claims  of  the  two 
kinds  of  ordination  would  need  to  be  somehow  reconciled.  It 
has  been  proposed  to  meet  this  last  crucial  point  by  the  de- 
vice known  as  hypothetical  ordination. 

Hypothetical  Ordination. 
This  device  seems  to  have  been  first  proposed  at  the  Revo- 
lution under  William  of  Nassau,  when  the  latitudinarian 
Bishops  Tillotson,  Stillingfleet  and  Tennison  united  with 
Doctors  Baxter,  Calamy  and  Bates  in  an  effort  for  the  com- 
prehension of  the  ejected  Presbyterian  clergy  in  the  re-estab- 
lished Church  of  England.  The  office  for  ordaining  "  Priests, 
/.  c,  Presbyters  "^  was  to  be  amended  by  the  addition  of  the 
words, — ''If  they  sliall  not  have   been  already  ordained.     By 

^  These  titles  were  to  be  made  equivalent,  as  in  Laud's  Scottish  Prayer-book 
"  Presbyter"  was  everywhere  substituted  for  "  Priest." 


2o6  The  Historic  Presbyterate. 

which  the  church,  as  she  retains  her  opinion  and  practice, 
which  make  a  Bishop  necessary  to  the  giving  of  orders  when 
he  can  be  had ;  so  she  does  likewise  leave  all  such  persons  as 
have  been  ordained  by  Presbyters  only,  the  freedom  of  their 
own  thoughts  concerning  their  former  ordinations."  ^  It  was 
expressly  provided  that  this  measure  must  not  become  a  pre- 
cedent and  that  its  operation  would  cease  after  a  given  date. 
The  Ordinal  was  still  further  to  be  amended  by  converting 
the  imperative  form,  "  Receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost,"  into  the 
precatory  form  of  an  invocation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  according 
to  primitive  as  distinguished  from  papal  usage.  The  Letters 
of  Orders  granted  to  such  persons  would  also  disclaim 
any  intention  of  condemning  their  former  ordinations  or  of 
determining  either  their  validity  or  their  invalidity.  It  was 
the  opinion  of  Calamy  that  upon  these  terms  at  least  two- 
thirds  of  the  Presbyterian  ministers  would  have  returned  into 
the  establishment.  There  had  been  some  reaction  in  their 
favor  against  the  rigors  of  the  Act  of  Uniformity.  The  Cal- 
vinistic  King  William  naturally  viewed  the  inclusion  of  such 
Protestants  to  be  as  consequent  upon  his  coming  to  the 
throne  as  the  exclusion  of  the  Romanists.  But  he  had  per- 
mitted the  downfall  of  Episcopacy  in  Scotland,  where  the 
Presbyterians  were  having  their  turn  at  ejecting  the  prela- 
tists.  Moreover,  the  scheme  was  weighed  down  with  other 
more  radical  amendments.  The  result  was  that  the  attempted 
compromise  was  a  failure,  and  the  Act  of  Uniformity  gave 
place  to  the  Act  of  Toleration  as  the  only  substantial  advan- 
tage then  attainable. 

Different  as  the  circumstances  of  the  parties  are  in  this 
country  and  in  this  age,  yet  the  idea  of  a  conditional  ordina- 
tion, analogous  to  conditional  baptism,  has  been  broached  in 
recent  discussions  by  some  earnest  inquirers  into  the  grounds 
and  conditions  of  church   unity.^     It  has  even  been  gener- 

^  Procter's  History  of  Prayer-book,  p.  158. 

2  Address  of  the  Bishop  of  Western  Texas,  Right  Rev.  James  S.  Johnston,  D.D. 


Hypothetical  Ordination.  207 

ously  proposed  to  insert  it  in  a  conspicuous  rubric  as  a  stand- 
ing welcome  to  other  ministries,  to  show  that  the  Quadrilat- 
eral has  been  issued  in  good  faith  and  in  the  earnest  hope  of 
its    adoption.      Perhaps,   however,   as    to  the    Presbyterian 
Church  at  least,  it  is  too  soon  to  discuss  the  wisdom  of  an 
expedient  which  presupposes  a  degree  of  intelligent  agree- 
ment that  has  not  yet  been  reached.     If  the  measure  would 
meet  the  scruples  of  some  Episcopalians  who  take  a  strict 
view  of  episcopal  ordination,  yet  it  might  not  so  readily  meet 
the  scruples  of  some  Presbyterians  who  take  a  like  view  of 
presbyterial  ordination  and  would  not  care  to  have  a  slur  or 
shadow  openly  cast  upon  their  former  ministry.     Presbyte- 
rians who  doubt  of  their  former  ministry,  or  take  a  low  view 
of  it,  would  not  scruple  at  unconditional   re-ordination,  but 
even  prefer  it  as  affording  proof  of  their  church  loyalty,  their 
good  fellowship  with   high  churchmen,  and  their  desire  to 
receive  the  full  benefit  of  holy  orders.     Moreover,  anything 
that  is  good  in  the  proposed  rubric  for  hypothetical  ordination 
seems  to  have  been  already  provided  in  the  American  Ordinal 
by  the  alternative  form  "  Take  thou  authority,"  as  contrasted 
with  the  earlier  form,  "  Receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost."     If  the 
new  form  merely  expresses  the  outward  call  of  the  church, 
while  the  earlier  expresses  also  the  inward  call  of  the  Spirit, 
a  Presbyterian  minister  so  re-ordained  might  think  he  was 
simply  gaining  new  ecclesiastical  authority  and  larger  province 
for  a  ministry  to  which  he  had  already  been  called  of  God  in 
his  former  ordination.     Unless  he  held  high  sacramentarian 
views  of  the  rite  itself,  the  mere  repetition   of  the  ceremony 
misrht  not  violate  his  convictions  nor  be  inconsistent   with 
some  usages  and  precedents. 

All  this,  however,  is  somewhat  aside  from  the  real  question 
before  us.  It  applies  merely  to  the  case  of  a  Presbyterian 
clergyman  seeking  holy  orders  in  the  Episcopal  Church,  and 
would  have  importance  only  for  those  who  expect  that  com- 
munion somehow  to  absorb  other  communions,  in  spite  of 
the  disclaimer  of  the  bishops.     It  does  not  apply  to  the  rela- 


2o8  The  Historic  Presbyterate. 

tions  of  the  two  communions.  As  yet  there  is  no  such  open 
and  candid  understanding  between  them  as  would  justify  on 
both  sides  the  episcopal  ordination  or  even  authorization  of 
Presbyterian  ministers.  The  difficulty  remains,  to  find  some 
more  mutual  recognition  not  only  in  ordination,  but  also  in 
jurisdiction.  To  meet  that  difficulty  a  method  has  been  pro- 
posed on  page  99  which  may  now  be  more  fully  considered. 

Concurrent  Ordination. 

The  principles  involved  in  concurrent  ordination  are  not 
new  in  the  history  of  the  two  communions.  The  Church  of 
England  from  the  beginning  has  associated  presbyters  with 
bishops  in  giving  presbyterial  orders,  and  the  American 
Church  has  admitted  them  to  a  participation  to  some  extent 
in  the  Episcopal  jurisdiction.  In  like  manner  the  Presbyte- 
rian Church,  during  its  early  days  in  Scotland  and  through 
the  Westminster  divines  in  the  Savoy  Conference,  may  be 
said  to  have  committed  itself  to  a  pure  episcopacy,  as  both 
scriptural  and  apostolical,  and  might  now  find  in  it  a  wise 
stable  administration  of  the  episcopal  functions  of  presbytery. 
These  mutual  principles  historically  underlie  and  logically 
connect  the  two  churches.  The  only  novelty  proposed  is 
that  they  should  now  be  formally  professed  and  openly  acted 
upon  ;  in  other  words,  that  both  authorities  should  visibly 
concur  in  future  ordinations,  when  a  coincident  jurisdiction  is 
found  feasible  without  destroying  or  impairing  the  normal 
relations  of  Episcopacy  and  Presbytery,  as  already  existing 
or  illustrated  in  both  communions.  How  this  might  be  at- 
tempted has  been  explained  with  some  detail  in  the  previous 
essay. 

If  this  suggestion  have  no  other  merit,  it  may  at  least  serve 
to  confront  the  parties  with  the  real  difficulties  of  the  situa- 
tion. These  are  serious  enough,  but  not  so  amusing  as 
represented  by  some  critics  who  have  imagined  a  Presby- 
terian minister  armed  with  a  sort  of"  double  ordination  "  and 
turned  loose  as  a  knight-errant  of  church  unity.     That  might 


Concurrent  Ordination.  209 

not  be  possible  under  existing  relations,  since  he  would  have 
to  renounce  his  former  allegiance,  if  he  could  not  retain 
it,  or  else  sink  into  mere  individual  insignificance.  But  it 
should  be  borne  in  mind  that  here,  as  throughout  the  whole 
argument,  we  are  still  proceeding  on  the  assumption  that 
the  Lambeth  conditions  of  church  standing  and  comity  have 
been  accepted  and  are  to  be  adopted  and  acted  upon  as  far 
and  as  fast  as  possible.  In  that  view  the  suggested  concur- 
rence of  authorities  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  mere  transitional 
expedient  in  the  unifying  process.  It  would  provide  for  a 
gradual  coincidence  of  jurisdiction  wherever  possible,  as 
on  mission  fields  and  in  the  army  and  navy,^ — leaving 
meanwhile  existing  Presbyterian  clergymen,  in  cases  requir- 
ing it,  to  be  episcopally  licensed,  as  in  the  early  Church  of 
England,  or  to  receive  a  purely  ecclesiastical  ordination  like 
that  proposed  in  1689  and  apparently  adopted  in  the  Ameri- 
can Ordinal.^  Against  such  a  scheme  it  is  easy  enough  to 
magnify  and  multiply  difficulties,  constitutional  and  canonical, 
on  both  sides, — in  a  word  to  show  how  not  to  do  the  thing 
proposed.  The  present  writer  is  trying  to  show  how  to  do 
it ;  and  if  any  one  will  show  a  more  excellent  way  he  will  be 
the  first  to  welcome  it. 

What  are  the  alternative  methods  ?  One  of  them  would  be 
to  use  the  Quadrilateral  as  a  solvent  for  breaking  up  and  ab- 
sorbing the  Presbyterian  Church,  but  that  would  be  contrary 


1  A  highly  esteemed  Army  Chaplain  writes  me,  that  whenever  he  invites  the 
visiting  Bishop  to  the  Chapel  at  his  post,  he  is  only  recognized  by  being  publicly 
thanked  for  his  courtesy.  "  Concurrent  ordination  "  he  says,  "  would  relieve  the 
situation." 

2  If  this  dormant  provision  was  inserted  by  Bishop  White  with  a  purpose,  it 
may  yet  be  found  available  ;  and  new  meaning  might  appear  in  Archbishop  Bram- 
hall's  form  of  licensure  to  a  Scotch  Presbyter,— "  not  destroying  his  former 
orders,  nor  determining  their  validity  or  invalidity,  but  only  supplying  what  the 
canons  of  the  English  Church  require  and  providing  that  occasion  of  schism  be 
removed,  and  the  faithful  assured  that  they  may  not  doubt  of  his  ordination,  or 
be  averse  to  his  presbyterial  acts  as  invalid." — Anglo-Catholic  Library,  Vol.  I, 
p.  xxxvii. 

14 


2IO  The  Historic  Presbyter  ate. 

to  its  own  professions.  Another  would  be  to  let  it  stand  as 
a  bond  of  theoretical  and  sentimental  fellowship  between  the 
two  communions  ;  but  such  a  bond  could  not  last  long  unless 
some  more  organic  filaments  were  woven  into  it.  Still  another 
method  would  be  to  wait  until  the  Presbyterian  Church  by- 
its  own  development  shall  have  secured  the  historic  episco- 
pate in  some  other  quarter.  That  course  will  doubtless  be 
taken  very  naturally  by  the  Lutheran  Church,  and  its  ac- 
quisition of  the  Swedish  episcopate,  besides  perfecting  its 
own  church  order,  will  be  an  immense  logical  gain  to  the 
Lambeth  standard  by  freeing  it  from  Anglican  and  Protestant 
Episcopal  implications  in  the  popular  mind  and  thus  demon- 
strating that  the  proposed  terms  of  church  unity  are  cath- 
olic and  undenominational,  as  well  as  practicable.  Yet  even 
then  two  such  rival  episcopates  could  only  secure  church 
likeness,  or  church  union,  not  church  unity.  The  problem 
of  jurisdiction  would  still  remain  unsolved  and  only  more 
complicated.  Surely,  when  Presbyterians  begin  to  appreciate 
the  historic  episcopate  for  its  unifying  qualities,  they  would 
want  nothing  foreign  or  sectarian  in  it,  but  rather  gladly  wel- 
come what  Dr.  Huntington  fittingly  terms  "  the  episcopate 
of  the  race  which  gave  us  our  language  and  at  least  a  good 
fraction  of  our  law." 

It  may  still  be  objected  that  the  Chicago  Declaration  pre- 
sents the  historic  episcopate  as  one  of  the  "  inherent  parts  of 
a  sacred  deposit  of  Christian  faith  and  order  committed  by 
Christ  and  his  Apostles  to  the  Church,"  which  would  be 
compromised  or  surrendered  in  any  concordat  with  the  Pres- 
byterian ministry.  ^  Some  Episcopalians  have  detached  this 
qualifying  preamble  from  the  terms  themselves,  and  do  not 
find  it  in  the  Prayer-book.  Nor  does  it  necessarily  inhere  in 
the  Fourth  Article  as  it  has  been  held  historically  and  doc- 
trinally  throughout  the  universal  church.     In  fact,  it  has  not 


^  "  The  Historical  Position  of  the  Episcopal  Church."    By  Rev.  Prof.  Francis 
G.  Hall,  Western  Theological  Seminary,  Chicago. 


ConciLrreiit  Ordination.  2 1 1 

even  been  adopted  by  the  great  Pan-Anglican  Council  of  Bish- 
ops, whose  amended  version  of  the  Quadrilateral  must  now 
be  accepted  by  all  parties.  They  attach  no  qualification  to 
it,  but  simply  offer  it  as  the  basis  of  a  "  United  Church  to 
include  the  chief  Christian  Communions,"  and  recommend 
brotherly  conference  with  their  representatives,  "in  order  to 
consider  what  steps  can  be  taken  either  toward  corporate 
re-union  or  toward  such  relations  as  may  prepare  the  way  for 
fuller  organic  unity  hereafter;"^ — which  seems  to  be  the  very 
policy  here  advocated.  Even  if  it  be  held  that  the  Chicago 
preamble  was  implied  or  involved  in  the  action  of  the  Angli- 
can Bishops,  it  would  still  remain  true  that  their  claim  of 
trusteeship  is  unhappily  repudiated  by  an  immense  majority 
of  historic  episcopates  throughout  the  Christian  world,  to 
say  nothing  of  churchmen  like  Dr.  Harwood,  who  hold  that 
episcopacy  is  not  a  divine,  but  an  ecclesiastical  institution.^ 
This  would  be  an  Episcopalian  answer  to  the  objection  be- 
fore us. 

There  is,  however,  a  more  positive  and  satisfactory  answer 
from  the  Presbyterian  side.  We  may  unhesitatingly  and 
gladly  yield  the  chief  place  to  our  American  Bishops  as  cus- 
todians of  the  primitive  faith  and  order,  and  still  maintain  that 
the  proposed  re-union  would  involve  no  compromise  or  sur- 
render of  their  trust.  In  the  first  place,  the  Presbyterian 
Church  also  claims  to  be  part  of  that  "  Catholic  Visible 
Church  unto  which  Christ  hath  given  the  ministry,  oracles 
and  ordinances  of  God,"  ^  and  has  preserved  its  sacred  trust 
by  means  of  a  presbyterial  succession  from  the  Apostles, 
which  is  as  certain  and  unquestionable  as  any  merely  pre- 
latic  succession  in  Christendom,  for  the  simple  reason  that 
it  underlies  and  shares  all  such  succession  until  the  Reform- 


1  Lambeth  Conferences,  iSSS,  "  Resolutions  Formally  Adopted,"  p.  2S0. 

2  "  The  Historic  Episcopate  and  Apostolic   Succession."      By  Rev.  Edwin 
Harwood,  D.  D.,  New  Haven. 

3  Confession  of  Faith,  Chap.  XXV. 


212  The  Historic  Presbyterate. 

ation,  and  since  then  has  been  maintained  with  scrupulous 
regularity  in  both  the  Scottish  and  American  presbyteries. 
But  let  that  pass  for  what  it  is  worth  in  this  argument.^  In 
the  second  place,  the  trusteeship  of  our  honored  Bishops, 
even  in  the  highest  possible  estimate  of  it,  could  not  be 
imperiled  but  would  only  be  confirmed  and  secured  by  the 
loyal  return  of  a  free  presbytery  into  normal  relations  with  a 
pure  episcopacy  on  their  own  proffered  terms  of  unity.  The 
result  would  simply  be  a  gradual  enlargement  of  episcopal 
jurisdiction  without  any  sacrifice  of  presbyterial  integrity,  and 
a  practical  mergence  of  interests  rendering  any  assertion  of 
rival  claims  and  rights  both  useless  and  distasteful.  The 
time  would  have  come  to  let  bygones  be  bygones  and  gen- 
erously end  the  old  family  quarrel  in  a  true  apostolic  love- 
feast.  Episcopalians  and  Presbyterians,  forgetting  their  "  end- 
less genealogies  and  contentions,"  would  have  met  together 
on  the  Lambeth  basis,  like  good  Christians  and  good  church- 
men, determined  to  get  the  full  benefit  of  both  episcopal  and 
presbyterial  ordination,  as  no  longer  to  be  practiced  separate- 
ly, but  henceforth  to  be  re-combined  in  a  United  Church. 

The  circumstances  of  the  two  communions  in  this  new 
world  are  highly  favorable  for  their  organic  reunion.  After 
dominating  one  another  by  turns  in  the  old  world,  they  are 
now  upon  an  equal  footing  before  the  law  and  in  the  view  of 
surrounding  denominations.  They  have  become  assimilated 
in  their  constitution.  They  are  theoretically  one  in  ecclesias- 
tical doctrine.  Already  they  have  a  proposed  basis  of  ecclesi- 
astical intercommunion.     They  are  drawn  together  by  early 


1  It  will  be  remembered  that  when  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  in  1850  de- 
clared that  there  were  not  two  bishops  on  the  bench  or  one  clergyman  in  fifty 
who  would  deny  the  validity  of  the  Presbyterian  orders,  solely  on  account  of 
-wanting  the  imposition  of  episcopal  hands,  the  learned  Dr.  Goode  in  his  "  Vindi- 
cation," produced  a  long  chain  of  authorities,  including  the  most  eminent 
prelates  and  divines,  all  maintaining  that  bishops  and  presbyters  were  of  the 
same  divine  order,  and  must  therefore  be  included  in  the  same  apostolic  succes- 
sion, however  much  they  may  differ  in  ecclesiastical  office  and  dignity. 


Co7icurrent  Ordination.  213 

affinities  and  by  the  Christian  spirit  of  the  age.  Their  union 
would  be  a  mutual  benefit,  would  strengthen  historic  Chris- 
tianity amid  our  unhistoric  civilization,  would  combine  the 
two  most  ecclesiastical  denominations  against  sectarianism, 
and  would  lead  the  American  churches  toward  catholic  unity. 
They  seem  charged  with  the  fate  of  Protestant  Christendom. 
Let  us  now  suppose,  for  the  sake  of  illustration,  a  con- 
currence of  Presbyterian  and  Episcopalian  authorities  to 
have  been  effected  in  the  future  ordination  of  candidates  for 
mission  fields,  either  with  or  without  a  joint  imposition  of 
hands,  any  priests  present  with  the  bishop,  having  had  formerly 
Presbyterian  ordination  or  being  themselves  Presbyterian 
ministers  who  have  had  formerly  Episcopal  ordination.  Under 
some  such  agreement  the  utmost  claims  of  both  churches 
would  be  practically  recognized  and  satisfied  and  all  require- 
ments merged  in  one  common  sanction.  A  missionary  thus 
ordained  would  go  forth  with  double  authority,  into  a  wider  field, 
for  a  fuller  service,  and  everywhere  represent  a  united  Church 
at  least  to  heathenism  abroad  if  not  to  infidelity  at  home. 
Even  re-ordination  under  such  a  system  could  not  be  offensive 
to  those  who  deny  any  sacramental  grace  in  the  mere  rite 
itself,  but  might  rather  be  approved  by  a  sound  Christian  feel- 
ing for  the  sake  of  the  great  ends  in  view.  Meanwhile  the 
two  communions,  though  still  distinct,  would  be  touching  at 
other  vital  points.  On  the  one  side,  as  such  concurrent  or- 
dinations became  frequent,  bishops  and  rectors,  without  losing 
consistency  or  regularity,  could  yield  to  Presbyterian  minis- 
trations a  practical  recognition,  far  more  genuine  and  complete 
than  any  for  which  some  are  now  pleading.  On  the  other 
side,  as  such  relations  grew  closer,  by  means  of  an  elective 
episcopate  presbyteries  might  be  made  coincident  with 
deaneries,  synods  with  dioceses,  and  assemblies  with  con- 
ventions in  one  national  system.  And  so  at  length  both 
communions  might  find  it  a  good  and  comely  thing  to  join 
forces  and  fall  into  line  with  the  great  Catholic  Church  of  the 
past  and  of  the  future. 


214  The  Historic  Presbyte^^ate. 

The  Hope  of  Reunion. 

The  Bible  is  full  of  ideals  no  more  feasible  than  this.  In 
estimating  them,  we  dare  not  belittle  those  divine  powers  and 
promises  which  are  stronger  than  any  human  reasoning  and 
before  which  all  human  passions  and  prejudices  melt  away 
like  morning  mists.  That  fraternal  impulse  which  is  now 
abroad  in  the  churches,  vague  though  it  seems,  if  kindled  by 
the  Holy  Spirit,  may  yet  sweep  all  our  polemics  aside.  Per- 
haps ministers  as  a  body  do  not  want  church  unity,  but  the 
Christian  masses  do  want  it,  and  would  have  it  on  any  just 
terms  that  can  be  devised.  Should  the  terms  proposed  be 
found  feasible  they  might  not  share  the  sensitiveness  of  the 
clerical  mind  on  points  of  coordination  or  re-ordination  as 
raised  against  unity.  Nor  need  we  fear  that  sacred  trusts,  en- 
dowed interests  and  revered  traditions  are  to  be  roughly 
overridden  in  the  unifying  process.  Providence  in  bringing 
about  great  social  changes  often  gently  smooths  the  way, 
until  foes  are  glad  to  meet  as  friends  and  welcome  as  a  bless- 
ing what  they  had  dreaded  as  a  calamity.  The  Old  and  New 
School  Presbyterians  of  the  past  generation  once  seemed 
farther  apart  than  the  Presbyterian  and  Episcopalian  Church- 
men of  to-day. 

The  Church  of  Christ,  like  the  kingdom  of  nature,  is  yet  to 
be  strong  in  its  unity  as  well  as  rich  in  its  variety.  Its  full 
glory  can  never  come  until  different  denominations  shall 
appear  in  the  same  ecclesiastical  system,  showing  forth  their 
essential  harmony  amid  trivial  diversity.  That  denomination- 
alism,  or  ecclesiasticism,  which  fancies  that  it  has  no  need  of 
any  larger  and  fuller  organization,  is  but  a  vain  hallucination 
of  the  members  dreaming  among  themselves  that  they  can 
do  without  one  another  in  the  Body  of  Christ.  Not  until 
their  sleeping  catholicity  awakes;  not  until  their  mere  senti- 
mental oneness  becomes  organic;  not  until  their  invisible  unity 
makes  itself  everywhere  visible,  will  the  living  Church  stand 
forth,  "  fair  as  the  moon,  clear  as  the  sun,  and  terrible  as  an 
army  with  banners." 


VIII. 

THE  HISTORIC  LITURGY  AND  THE 
HISTORIC  CHURCHES. 


VIII. 

THE  HISTORIC  LITURGY  AND  THE  HISTORIC 

CHURCHES. 

In  a  previous  part  of  this  volume  attention  has  been  drawn 
to  the  unifying  influence  of  the  English  liturgy  among  the 
Christian  denominations,  as  seen  in  their  growing  observance 
of  the  Christian  year,  their  increasing  taste  for  liturgical 
worship,  and  their  occasional  use  of  such  forms  as  the  Lord's 
Prayer,  the  Creeds,  the  Commandments,  the  Psalter,  and  the 
ancient  Canticles.  It  is  proposed  now  to  show  this  more 
fully  and  clearly  by  analyzing  the  Prayer-book  into  its  con- 
stituent elements  and  exhibiting  them  as  historically  connected 
with  our  oldest  Churches  and  as  still  adapted  to  their  various 
denominational  modes  of  worship. 

To  effect  this  analysis  we  need  only  take  the  standard  edi- 
tion of  the  Church  of  England,  and  rearrange  its  offices  in 
more  normal  relations  on  liturgical  principles,  that  is  to  say, 
with  a  careful  reference  to  their  original  structure,  design,  and 
use  ;  making  only  such  editorial  changes  in  the  rubrics  as 
will  render  the  reconstructed  services  coherent  and  intelli^i- 
ble.  The  result  is  the  reappearance  of  two  distinct  sets  of 
devotional  offices,  the  one  Catholic  and  the  other  Protestant. 

Applying  the  term  Catholic  to  those  offices  and  parts  of 
offices  which  date  before  the  Reformation,  and  the  term 
Protestant  to  those  which  came  after  that  epoch,  the  editor  has 
endeavored  to  trace  them  both  to  the  original  formularies 
from  which  they  were  severally  compiled  and  to  disentangle 
them  from  their  present  combination  in  the  Prayer-book, 
restoring  the  Catholic  forms  to  their  primitive  integrity  and 
purity,  and  retaining  the  Protestant  forms  in  their  unmixed 
state  as  they  first  appeared  in  their  original  simplicity.     Diffi- 

217 


2i8  The  Historic  Liturgy. 

cult  as  this  task  may  seem  at  first  sight,  it  becomes  easy- 
enough  to  a  student  of  the  Prayer-book,  who  approaches  it 
with  no  other  aim  than  the  one  here  proposed.  Those  who 
have  been  long  accustomed  to  that  compilation  in  its  present 
state  may  look  upon  it  as  fixed  and  final,  or  as  susceptible 
merely  of  greater  flexibility  and  enrichment,  and  would 
scarcely  think  of  anything  so  seemingly  radical  as  the  re- 
construction of  a  compilation  which  has  lasted  three  hundred 
years.  This  might  occur  only  to  one  who  can  go  back  of 
vested  rights  and  prescriptive  usages  and  study  the  sources 
of  the  book  afresh,  without  constraint  or  prejudice,  yet  with 
that  reverential  feeling  which  these  venerable  forms  are  fitted 
to  inspire. 

It  is  only  necessary  to  take  such  a  position  in  order  to  see 
how  incongruous  are  the  two  classes  of  forms  which  have  be- 
come mixed  together  in  the  Prayer-book.  Their  diversity  will 
at  once  appear  in  their  separate  origin  and  use,  and  it  will  require 
no  great  amount  of  critical  skill  to  detect  it  in  their  very  form 
and  structure  ;  the  Catholic  portions  having  been  designed  for  a 
monastic  and  choral  ritual  as  sung  by  priest  and  choir  in  the 
Latin  tongue,  whilst  the  Protestant  portions  were  composed 
in  English,  and  plainly  adapted  to  a  service  that  is  didactic 
and  popular,  to  be  said  by  minister  and  people.  This  will 
appear  as  we   proceed  in  a  careful  analysis  of  the  several 

oftices. 

Composition  of  the  Daily  Offices. 

"  The  Order  for  Daily  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer,"  when 
traced  to  its  sources,  will  be  found  to  have  been  simply  a  modi- 
fied translation  of  the  Catholic  ritual  for  matins  and  vespers 
with  a  Protestant  preface  and  supplement.  The  preface 
includes  the  Sentences,  the  Exhortation,  the  General  Con- 
fession and  the  Absolution  or  Remission  of  Sins  ;  and  the 
supplement  comprises  the  Prayers  for  Rulers,  for  the  Clergy, 
and  for  All  Conditions  of  Men,  with  the  General  Thanksgiv- 
ing. Take  away  the  Protestant  additions  and  there  will  remain 
the  Lord's  Prayer,  the  Versicles,   Daily    Psalter,  Canticles, 


Composition  of  the  Daily  Offices.  2 1 9 

Creed,  and  two  Daily  Collects ;  forms  well  adapted  to  the 
musical  rendering  which  they  received  in  the  old  ritual,  and 
together  making  a  devotional  office  complete  in  itself  without 
the  preface  or  supplement  It  is  so  presented  in  this  essay, 
precisely  as  it  appeared  in  King  Edward's  first  Prayer-book 
of  1549,  and  with  the  same  descriptive  title,  TJie  Order  of 
Matins  and  Evensong  TJirotigJioiit  the  Year. 

Returning  now  to  the  Protestant  portions  of  the  office,  we 
meet  with  a  set  of  forms  which  are  of  entirely  different  origin 
and  structure.  The  prefatory  part  which  was  not  prefixed 
to  the  English  Matins  and  Evensong  until  the  revision  in 
1552,  was  then  taken,  both  as  to  form  and  purport,  from  Cal- 
vinistic  liturgies  where  it  served  as  a  penitential  introduction 
to  divine  service  on  the  Lord's  Day  ;  the  Sentences  inciting  to 
repentance,  the  Exhortation  explaining  the  duties  of  public 
worship,  and  the  General  Confession  and  Absolution  taking 
the  place  of  the  discarded  confessional.  The  supplement  also 
was  a  gradual  accretion,  not  fully  incorporated  in  the  daily 
office  until  the  last  revision  in  166 1,  and  at  first  consisted  of 
special  prayers  for  occasional  use,  wholly  unlike  the  ancient 
versicular  petitions  for  king,  ministers  and  people;  the  Gen- 
eral Thanksgiving  having  been  added  to  meet  a  felt  want  in 
Protestant  worship.  Even  the  Old  and  New  Testament  Les- 
sons, now  found  in  the  body  of  the  office,  were  originally 
ordered  to  be  read  to  the  people  in  English,  the  one  after 
Matins  and  the  other  after  Vespers,  several  years  before  those 
Latin  services  were  rendered  in  the  mother  tongue.  Bringing 
together  these  various  Protestant  forms  and  re-arranging 
them  in  the  order  in  which  they  were  first  used  and  are  still 
used  in  other  Reformed  Churches,  we  have  that  didactic  and 
homiletic  office  which  appears  in  this  essay  under  the 
original  title.  The  Order  for  Divine  Seiince  on  the  Lord's  Day. 

The  Litany,  being  an  English  revision  of  the  Catholic 
original,  to  be  sung  as  well  as  said,  is  fitly  attached  to  the 
old  ritual  for  use  on  certain  holy  days ;  but  its  following 
miscellany  of  Special  Prayers  and  Thanksgivings  which  have 


220  Ttie  Historic  Liturgy. 

accumulated  since  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  owing  to  their 
Protestant  date  and  form,  are  more  appropriately  classed 
with  the  Reformed  Sunday  service  above  described.  It 
will  be  found  that  the  Daily  Office,  with  the  exception  of  the 
Canticles,  Creed  and  Collects,  has  been  derived  from  the 
Scriptures,  in  Scripture  language,  and  is  simply  a  devotional 
expression  of  the  great  essential  truths  common  to  Catholic 
and  Protestant  Christianity;  whilst  the  Sunday  service  is 
substantially  that  now  practiced  by  all  the  Protestant  churches 
in  the  land,  and  sets  forth  in  a  liturgical  form  their  essential 
unity  in  worship  amid  diversity  in  doctrine  and  polity. 

Composition  of  the  Communion  Office, 
"  The  Order  for  the  Administration  of  the  Lord's  Supper, 
or  Holy  Communion,"  when  analyzed  in  like  manner,  is 
found  to  contain  the  Catholic  ritual  of  the  Mass  with  Protest- 
ant ante-communion  and  post-communion  forms  incorporated 
in  it,  very  much  as  similar  additions  were  made  to  the  Daily 
office.  The  Catholic  portion  embraces  The  Lord's  Prayer, 
Lesser  Litany,  The  Collect  for  Purity,  The  Collect,  Epistle  and 
Gospel  for  the  Day,  The  Nicene  Creed,  The  Offertory, 
Versicles,  Prefaces,  Ter  Sanctus,  Prayer  of  Consecration,  The 
Lord's  Prayer,  Thanksgiving,  Gloria  in  Excelsis,  Benediction. 
Re-arranging  these  beautiful  forms  strictly  in  their  original 
order,  and  restoring  one  or  two  others,  The  Introit  and 
Agnus  Dei,  as  they  appear  translated  in  King  Edward's  first 
Prayer-book,  we  have  a  communion  office  which  is  complete 
in  itself  without  the  Protestant  additions,  and  wonderfully 
adapted  to  the  most  artistic  as  well  as  to  the  plainest  modes 
of  celebration.  As  presented  in  a  separate  form  in  this 
essay,  it  is  entitled  The  Order  for  the  Celebration  of  the 
Holy  Communion. 

The  remaining  Protestant  portion  of  the  office,  except  The 
Ten  Commandments,  originally  formed  a  separate  English 
communion  service  for  the  laity,  following  the  Latin  Mass 
as  performed  by  the  clergy,  and  consisting  of  forms  in  which 


Composition  of  the  Commiinion  Office.         221 

the  general  communicant  might  participate  as  distinguished 
from  the  celebrant.  It  was  issued  at  least  a  year  before  the 
Prayer-book,  with  the  title  "  The  Order  of  the  Communion," 
and  when  incorporated  in  that  book,  still  appeared  under  the 
double  title,  "  The  Supper  of  the  Lord  and  Holy  Communion." 
It  embraces  ante-communion  services  remarkably  fitted  to 
induce  in  expecting  communicants  the  becoming  graces  of 
knowledge,  charity,  penitence,  assurance,  and  humility.  The 
Exhortation  instructs  them  in  the  meaning  and  use  of  the 
sacrament.  The  Invitation  encourages  them  to  come  at  peace 
with  God  and  their  neighbors.  The  Confession  expresses 
their  deep  and  pungent  conviction.  The  Absolution  prayer- 
fully assures  them  of  pardon.  The  Comfortable  Words 
inspire  them  with  faith  and  hope;  and  the  Prayer  of  Humble 
Access,  mingles  all  these  feelings  in  trustful  lowliness.  The 
brief  post-communion  services  have  a  like  fitness  to  worthy 
communicants  ;  the  Sentences  of  Scripture,  reminding  them 
of  consequent  privileges  and  duties;  the  Thanksgivings, 
declaring  their  renewed  self-consecration  and  grateful  faith; 
the  Hymn  or  Doxology,  their  joyful  praise  ;  and  the  Benedic- 
tion, their  dismissal  with  the  Divine  approval.  Detaching 
now  all  these  Protestant  forms  from  their  present  connections, 
and  re-combining  them  in  the  exact  order  in  which  they 
were  first  used,  with  one  or  two  forms  added  to  complete  the 
office,  we  have  a  communion  service  substantially  the  same 
as  that  known  in  the  Reformed  churches,  by  the  title  here 
prefixed  to  it,  TJie  Order  for  the  Adniiiiistration  of  the  Lord's 
Supper. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  result  of  the  whole  analysis  is,  the 
re-appearance  of  two  distinct  formularies,  each  almost  com- 
plete in  itself,  the  one  designed  for  a  ritualistic  celebration  of 
the  sacrament  by  the  priest  and  choir,  and  the  other  for  its 
actual  administration  to  the  people.  The  two  might  be  used 
consecutively  without  any  repetition  or  confusion  ;  or  the 
former  might  be  used  without  the  latter,  especially  on  festival 
occasions ;  or  the  latter  might  be  used  without  the  former,  by 


22  2  TJie  Historic  Liturgy. 

simply  adding  a  consecrating  prayer  before  administering  the 
elements.  As  the  Prayer  of  Consecration,  though  founded 
upon  the  Catholic  ritual,  is  essentially  Protestant  in  its  whole 
structure  and  purport,  it  has  been  inserted  in  both  formularies. 
The  same  is  still  more  true  of  the  Prayer  for  the  Church 
Militant,  which  in  its  Catholic  form  belonged  to  the  canon  or 
fixed  portion  of  the  Mass  (where  undoubtedly  it  has  its  true 
place),  but  in  its  Protestant  form  has  by  long  usage  become 
practically  dissevered  from  the  Sacrament,  and  has,  therefore, 
been  inserted  in  the  Lord's-day  service  as  well  as  in  the 
Communion  office. 

As  to  the  Commandments,  it  should  be  observed  that  they 
are  not  to  be  found  in  any  Catholic  sacramentary,  but  were 
borrowed  from  Calvinistic  liturgies  in  1552,  and  apparently 
put  in  place  of  the  Lesser  Litany,  a  commandment  before 
each  Kyrie  {Lord  have  mercy)  with  additional  responsive  peti- 
tions of  Protestant  tenor.  They  have  therefore  been  restored 
to  the  Lord's  Day  service,  where  they  follow  the  Old  Testa- 
ment Lesson  as  a  summary  of  the  Law  ;  and  could  the  Beati- 
tudes in  like  manner  follow  the  New  Testament  Lesson  as  a 
summary  of  the  Gospel,  as  has  been  sometimes  proposed,  it 
would  be  a  very  appropriate  amendment.  The  editor  con- 
siders himself  limited  to  formulas  which  have  been  at  different 
times  authorized  and  actually  used  in  the  Prayer-book,  and 
only  in  this  instance  has  departed  from  his  rule. 

The  Kyries,  thus  freed  from  the  Decalogue,  have  been 
retained  in  their  original  connection,  as  they  appear  in  King 
Edward's  first  Prayer-book,  and  the  Gloria  in  Excelsis  has 
also  been  restored  to  its  true  position  at  the  beginning  of  the 
office,  in  accordance  with  the  Lutheran  office  and  with  all  good 
liturgical  usage.  "  The  Collects,  Epistles,  and  Gospels  to  be 
used  on  the  Sundays  and  Holydays  throughout  the  year," 
though  some  of  them  are  of  Protestant  date,  belong  to  the 
Ordinary  or  variable  portion  of  the  Mass,  and  have  been 
ommitted  as  not  essential  to  the  purpose  of  this  essay. 

It  will  now  be  seen  that  the  Communion  office,  as  thus  re- 


Composition  of  the  Baptis7iial  Offices.  223 

duced  to  its  component  parts,  exhibits  the  essentially  Chris- 
tian substance  of  the  Catholic  ritual  with  a  Protestant  form 
of  administration,  and  expresses  liturgically  that  commu- 
nion of  saints  at  the  table  of  their  common  Lord  and  Master, 
which  is  actually  experienced  in  all  true  churches  of  Christ, 
amid  all  their  varied  doctrines  and  usages. 

Composition  of  the  Baptismal  Offices. 

The  analysis  of  the  Baptismal  offices,  though  as  easily 
made  as  that  of  the  previous  offices,  will  bring  into  view  the 
Catholic  rite  of  church  initiation  with  sharper  Protestant 
definitions  of  doctrine,  and  would  require  more  or  less  modi- 
fication in  order  to  adapt  it  to  the  belief  and  practice  of  some 
churches  and  denominations  in  this  country. 

"  The  Ministration  of  Public  Baptism  of  Infants  "  is  com- 
posed of  a  few  Catholic  forms  interwoven  with  Protestant 
Exhortations,  Addresses,  Prayers,  and  Thanksgivings,  de- 
signed to  inculcate  upon  both  adults  and  children  the  duties 
and  privileges  of  church  membership.  If  freed  from  expres- 
sions which  are  supposed  to  countenance  some  invariable 
moral  renovation  in  the  action,  and  made  to  admit  parents 
for  sponsors,  as  now  allowed  in  both  the  Anglican  and  some 
American  churches,  it  would  not  be  inconsistent  with  the 
teaching  of  leading  denominations,  Lutheran,  Reformed,  Pres- 
byterian, Congregational,  and  Methodist. 

"  The  Ministration  of  Baptism  to  such  as  are  of  Riper 
Years,"  after  similar  modifications,  would  express  the  views 
of  Baptist  congregations  which  require  a  public  personal 
profession  of  faith  as  a  condition  precedent  to  this  sacra- 
ment, and  thus  in  fact  fulfil  one  design  of  the  oflRce,  as 
originally  framed  to  meet  the  case  of  those  who  from  disbe- 
lief, neglect,  or  any  cause  had  not  been  baptized  in  infancy. 

The  Catechism,  designed  for  the  instruction  of  baptized 
children  and  other  candidates  for  the  communion,  corresponds 
to  similar  forms  in  nearly  all  the  Protestant  churches,  and  is 


224  Th^  Historic  Liturgy. 

in  full  accord  with  them,  though  less  dogmatic  and  scholastic 
in  style  and  more  meagre  in  its  teaching. 

"  The  Order  of  Confirmation  or  Laying  on  of  Hands  upon 
those  that  are  Baptized  and  come  to  Years  of  Discretion,"  as 
it  stands,  implies  the  Episcopal  polity  of  the  Latin  and  Angli- 
can Churches,  as  was  shown  by  the  disuse  of  the  rite  in  the 
colonial  Episcopal  churches  during  the  century  when  they 
were  without  resident  bishops.  But  if  freed  from  that  impli- 
cation, it  would  agree  with  the  practice  of  the  Greek  and 
Lutheran  churches  and  after  slight  modification  would  express 
liturgically  the  views  of  Presbyterian  churches  which  hold  to 
parochial  in  distinction  from  diocesan  episcopacy,  and  indeed 
of  all  churches  which  have  any  mode  of  publicly  admitting 
baptized  persons  to  the  Lord's  table  and  full  communion. 

Of  the  Baptismal  offices  in  general  it  may  now  be  remarked 
that  if,  as  is  often  alleged,  they  are  charged  with  doctrinal 
views  not  held  by  most  American  churches,  yet  such  views 
are  not  essentially  involved  in  their  liturgical  structure  and 
literary  expression,  as  is  proved  by  the  existence  not  only  of 
diverse  interpretations,  but  of  different  versions  based  upon 
different  sacramental  theories. 

Composition  of  the  Occasional  Offices. 

The  remaining  offices,  as  usually  distinguished  from  "  The 
Book  of  Common  Prayer  and  Administration  of  the  Sacra- 
ments," maybe  included  under  the  added  clause  of  the  title, 
"and  other  rites  and  ceremonies  of  the  Church,"  and  will  be 
found  to  have  only  an  occasional  use  and  importance  at  the 
points  of  contact  between  Christianity  and  social  life. 

"  The  Form  of  Solemnization  of  Matrimony  "  contains  the 
Catholic  rite  amended  with  Protestant  addresses  and  prayers, 
and  freed  from  all  sacramental  ceremonies  except  that  of  a 
discretionary  administration  of  the  Holy  Communion.  Some 
indelicate  expressions  in  the  introductory  address,  though 
just  in  themselves,  were  happily  dropt  from  the  Protestant 


Composition  of  the  Occasional  Offices.  225 

Episcopal  version ;  but  one  or  two  others  inculcating  the 
Scriptural  view  of  marriage  have  been  wisely  retained  at  the 
recent  revision. 

"The  Order  for  the  Visitation  of  the  Sick,"  is  also  largely 
of  Catholic  origin,  with  the  exception  of  the  Protestant  Form 
of  Absolution,  the  Special  and  Commendatory  Prayers,  and 
the  Benediction;  and  it  would  need  but  slight  modification  in 
order  to  be  used  by  any  American  minister,  either  as  a  model 
or  as  a  form,  in  ministering  sick-room  consolations. 

"The  Order  for  the  Burial  of  the  Dead,"  retains  portions 
of  the  Catholic  ritual  interwoven  with  the  Protestant  Lesson 
and  Psalms,  Words  of  Committal,  Consolatory  Prayers  and 
Benediction, — the  whole  making  an  office  justly  celebrated 
for  its  fitness  and  beauty  in  all  the  English-speaking  races. 
Indeed,  the  Occasional  offices  as  a  class  have  already  won 
their  way  to  common  use  in  churches  which  have  no  liturgi- 
cal forms,  and  in  others  have  superseded  forms  felt  to  be  less 
expressive  and  appropriate.  Add  to  these  offices  the  Daily 
Prayers  which  are  largely  used  by  laymen  and  ministers,  the 
Proper  or  Festival  services  which  are  at  least  warranted  by 
the  popular  recognition  of  such  days  as  Christmas  and  Easter, 
and  there  will  remain  only  the  Communion  and  Baptismal 
offices  as  needing  to  be  modified  in  accordance  with  denomi- 
national views. 

We  have  now  sufficiently  analyzed  the  English  Prayer-book 
to  test  its  claims  to  general  acceptance  as  an  American  liturgy 
by  such  of  our  churches  or  congregations  as  are  inclined  to 
formulize  their  worship.  If  it  is  desired  to  express  liturgic- 
ally  the  ordinary  devotions  of  a  Christian  assembly,  the  meet 
commemoration  of  the  chief  Christian  events  and  doctrines, 
and  the  due  administration  of  the  Christian  rites  and  cere- 
monies, there  is  no  collection  of  forms  to  be  compared  with 
that  which  for  three  centuries  has  proclaimed  the  devout 
heart  of  the  English  speaking  races  of  Christendom. 

In  the  more  general  use  of  this  historic  liturgy  by  the 
historic  Churches  in  our  country,  there  may  be  a  feeling  of 
15 


2  26  The  Historic  Lihtrgy. 

inheritance  and  ownership  in  many  of  its  forms  as  well  as  an 
appreciation  of  their  intrinsic  fitness  and  beauty.  The  catholic 
portions  having  been  reformed  from  the  Roman  Breviary  and 
Missal  by  the  reformers  themselves,  Luther,  Calvin  and  Bucer 
as  well  as  Cranmer,  may  be  regarded  as  a  common  heritage 
of  all  the  Churches.  The  Protestant  portions  may  be  re- 
claimed by  the  Lutheran  Church  through  the  formularies  of 
Melanchthon  and  Bucer;  by  the  Reformed  Church,  through 
the  liturgies  of  Calvin,  Pollanus,  and  John  a  Lasco;  by  the 
Presbyterian  Church,  through  the  emendations  of  the  whole 
work  by  the  Westminster  divines  in  the  Savoy  Conference ; 
and  by  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  through  their  own 
version,  containing  not  only  the  original  contributions  of  the 
English  compilers  but  some  Presbyterian  emendations  which 
were  rejected  or  neglected  at  the  Savoy  Conference  in  1661. 

In  order  that  the  differences  between  the  Catholic  and 
Protestant  forms  may  appear  to  the  eye,  some  examples  have 
been  appended,  in  which  the  Catholic  portions  are  exhibited 
in  antique  type  and  the  Protestant  portions  in  modern  type  ; 
the  marginal  notes  giving  the  date,  origin,  authorship,  and 
affinity  of  all  the  particulars  which  each  office  contains. 

For  more  specific  references  and  authorities  the  reader  is 
referred  to  the  historical  and  critical  treatise,  appended  to  the 
Author's  edition  of  "  The  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  as 
amended  by  the  Presbyterian  Divines  in  the  Royal  Commis- 
sion of  1661." 


Catholic  FormiUaries.  227 


Ube  ©tber  tor  /IDatins  ant>  lEvensono  tbrouabout 

tF)e  l^ear. 

THE  LORD'S  PRAYER. 

\_The  Priest  shall  begin  with  a  loud  voice  the  Lord^s  Prayer,  called  the  Pater 
Noster\ 

©ur  jFatber,  wbicb  art  in  bcavcn,  IballoweD  be  tbs  IKlame.  Cb\j 
ftingDom  come.  c:bs  will  be  Done  in  eartb,  as  it  ia  i\\  beaven. 
Give  U0  tbis  &a^  our  &ails  breaD.  2lnD  torgive  us  our  trespasses, 
2ls  we  forgive  tbem  tbat  trespass  against  us.  anD  leaO  us  not 
into  temptation ;  JBut  Deliver  us  from  evil:  ^Fortbine  is  tbe  hing* 
dom,  Zhz  power,  and  tbe  glorg,  ffor  ever  anD  ever.    Bmen.^ 

Then  likewise  shall  the  Priest  say, 

©  XorD,  open  tbou  our  lips. 

Answer.    HuD  our  moutb  sball  sbew  tortb  tbg  praise.^ 

Priest.    ©  <3oO,  mafte  speeD  to  save  us. 

Answer.    ©  XorD,  mafte  baste  to  belp  us.^ 

Here  all  standing  tip,  the  Priest  shall  say, 

(3lors  be  to  tbe  3f  atber,  anD  to  tbe  Son :  anO  to  tbe  Ibol^  (3bost ; 
Answer.    Bs  it  was  in  tbe  beginning,  is  now,  anD  ever  sball  be: 
worlD  witbout  enD.    Bmen.* 
Priest    ipraise  ge  tbe  XorO.^ 
Answer.     The  Lord's  Name  be  praised.® 

Then  shall  be  said  or  sung  this  Psalm  following :  except  on  Easter  Day,  tipon 
which  another  Anthem  is  appointed;  and  on  the  Nineteenth  Day  of  every 
Month  it  is  not  to  be  read  here,  but  in  the  ordinary  course  of  the  Psalms. 

VENITE,  EXULTEMUS  DOMINO.  ^ 

©  come,  let  us  sing  unto  tbe  TLorD :  let  us  beartils  rejoice  in  tbe 
strengtb  ot  our  salvation. 


1  The  Lord's  Prayer.    Latin  Usage,  A.  D.  1200.     Said  secretly,  until  1st  Book 
of  Edward  VI ;   thereafter,  with  "  a  loud  voice." 

2  Ps.  li  :  15.     Latin  Usage,  A.  D.  600. 

^  Ps.  l.\x  :  I.      Saxon  Usage,  A.  D.  800. 

*  Council  of  Nicaea,  A.  D.  325.     Greek  and  Latin  Usage. 
5  Ps.     English  Usage,  A.  D.  1549. 

«  Bp.  Laud's  Prayer-Book,  A.  D.  1637.     English  Usage,  A.  D.  l66i. 

*  Ps.  xcv.     Ancient  Latin  Usage. 


2  28  The  Historic  Lihirgy. 

Then  shall  follow  the  Psalms  in  order  as  they  are  appointed.  ^  And  at  the  end 
of  every  Psalm  throughout  the  Year,  and  like-vise  at  the  end  of  Benedicite, 
Benedictus,  Magnificat,  and  Nunc  dimittis,  shall  be  repeated, 

©Iori2  be  to  tbe  3f  atber,  auD  to  tbe  Son :  anD  to  tbe  1boI^  (Sbost ; 
Answer.    Bs  it  was  in  tbe  beginning,  is  now,  anD  ever  sball  be : 
worlD  witbout  enJ).    Zlmen.^ 

Then  shall  be  read  distinetly  witli  an  audible  voiee  the  First  Lesson,  taken  out 
of  the  Old  Testament,  as  is  appointed  in  the  Calendar,  except  there  be  proper 
Lessons  assigned  for  that  day.  ^  And  after  that,  shall  be  said  or  sung,  in 
English,  the  Hynm  called  Te  Deum  Laudamus,  daily  throughout  the  Year. 

TE   DEUM   LAUDAMUS. 4 

Uae  praise  tbee,  ©  (5oD :  we  acftnowle^ge  tbce  to  be  tbe  XorD. 

*********** 

Or  this  Canticle. 
BENEDICITE,  OMNIA  OPERA,  s 

©  all  se  mor^s  of  tbe  XorO,  bless  ^e  tbe  XorO :  praise  bim,  anO 
magnitg  bim  tor  ever. 

*********** 

Then  shall  be  read  in  like  manner  the  Second  Lesson,  taken  out  of  the  N'eio 
Testament.  ^     And  after  that,  the  Hymn  following. 

BENEDICTUS.  7 

JSlesseD  be  tbe  TLorJ)  ©oD  ot  Hsrael:  tor  be  batb  visited,  anD 
reDeemeD  bis  people ; 

*********** 

Or  this  Psalm. 
JUBILATE   DEO.* 

O  be  jo^tul  in  tbe  Xor5,  all  ^e  lan&s :  serve  tbe  Xor&  witb  glaJ)* 
ness,  anO  come  before  bis  presence  witb  a  song. 


1  English  Usage,  A.  D.  1549.  2  English  Usage,  A.  D.  1549. 

s  English  Usage,  A.  D.  1549. 

*  Augustine    (?)     Ambrose    (?)      Hilary,    A.    D.    355.       Ancient    Latin    and 
English  Usage. 

5  "Song  of  the   Three   Children,"    Dan.,  Chap,   iii  and  Ps.  cxlviii.      Jewish, 
Greek,  Latin,  and  English  Usage. 

6  English  Usage,  A.  D.  1549. 

7  St.   Luke  i,  68.      "Song  of  the  Prophet  Zacharias."     Latin  and  English 
Usage. 

*  Ps.  c,  English  Usage,  A.  D.  1552. 


CatJiolic  Fo7'mularies.  229 

Then  shall  be   sung  or  said  the  Apostles'  Creed  by  the  Priest  and  the  people, 
standing:  ^ 

11  believe  In  GoD  tbe  jfatber  aimigbtg,  /llbafter  of  beaven  an5 
eartb : 

BnO  in  5esus  Cbrist  bis  onl^  Son  our  XorCi,  inabo  was  conceit eO 
bs  tbe  1bolB  Obost,  JGorn  of  tbe  Uirgin  /llbarg,  SutfereO  unDer 
Pontius  Pilate,  Was  crucifieD,  DeaD,  anD  buricD,  Ibe  DescenDeD 
into  bell ;  tbe  tbirO  Dag  be  rose  again  from  tbe  Dea&,  Ibe  ascen&eD 
into  beaven,  BnD  sittetb  o\\  tbe  ricibt  banD  of  Qo^  tbe  afatber 
Blmigbtv? ;  jf rom  tbencc  be  sball  come  to  juDge  tbe  quick  anD  tbe 
DeaD. 

II  believe  \\\  tbe  Ibol^  Gbost;  ^be  bol^  Catbolicft  Cburcb;  G:be 
Communion  of  Saints ;  Zbc  3f  orgiveness  of  sins ;  ^be  TRcsurrection 
of  tbe  boDg,  BnD  tbe  life  everlasting.    Bmen.^ 

And  after  that,  these  Prayers  following,  all  devoutly  kneeling. 

^be  XorC)  be  witb  \?ou. 

Answer.    BnD  witb  tb^  spirit.^ 

Priest.    Xet  US  pra^. 
XorC),  bave  merc^  upon  us. 

Gbrist,  bave  merc^  upon  us. 
XorD,  bave  mercy  upon  us.^ 

Then  the  Priest  standing  up,  shall  say, 

©  XorD,  sbcw  tbv  mercv  upon  us. 

Answer.     BnD  grant  us  tby  salvation.^ 

Friest.     O  XorO,  save  tbe  Queen. « 

Answer.    BnD  mercifully  bear  us  vvben  we  call  upon  tbee.'' 

Friest.     JEnDue  tby  /Ilbinistcrs  witb  rigbtcousness. 

Answer.    Bn5  ma??e  tby  cbosen  people  jo\>ful.* 

Friest.    0  XorC),  save  tbv  people. 

Atiswer.    BnC)  blcss  tbine  inberitance.^ 

Friest.     ©ive  peace  in  our  time,  0  XorD. 

^  English  Usage,  A.  D.  1549;  By  the  Priest  alone. 

2  Roman  Origin.     Ruffinus,  A.  D.  250. 

8  Apostolic  Origin,  Catholic  Usage. 

*  Lesser  Litany.     Greek  Origin,  Latin  Usage. 

5  Ps.  l.xxxv.  7.  s  "  The  State  :  "   P.  E.  Prayer-book. 

">  Ps.  XX.  9.  «  Ps.  cxxxii.  9.  9  Ps.  xxviii.  9. 


230  The  Historic  Liturgy. 

Answer.     3Becau0e  tberc  is  none  otbcr  tbat  figbtctb  for  us,  but 
onlstbou,  O  Qq^."- 
Pi'iest.     ©  (3o&,  ma!?e  clean  our  bearts  witbin  us,^ 
Answer.     2lnD  take  not  tb^  Ibolg  Spirit  from  us. 


Then  shall  follow  three  Collects  ;  the  first  of  the  Day,  which  shall  be  the  same 
that  is  appointed  at  the  Communion  ;  the  second  for  Peace  ;  the  third  for 
Grace  to  live  well.^ 

THE  SECOND  COLLECT,  FOR  PEACE. 

©  (3oC),  wbo  art  tbe  autbor  of  peace  anC)  lover  of  concorD,  in 
linowleDge  of  wbom  stanDctb  our  eternal  life,  wbose  service  is  per* 
fectfrecDom;  2)efen5  us  tb^  bumble  servants  in  all  assaults  of  our 
enemies ;  tbat  we,  surely  trusting  in  tbs  Defence,  ma^  not  fear  tbe 
power  of  ans  aOversaries ;  tbrougb  tbe  migbt  of  Jesus  Cbrist  our 
XorO.    Bmen.* 


THE  THIRD  COLLECT,  FOR  GRACE. 

0  XorD,  our  beavenl^  jfatber,  Blmigbt^  an&  everlasting  (5oD, 
wbo  bast  safely  brougbt  us  to  tbe  beginning  of  tbis  Da^ ;  E>efenD  us 
in  tbe  same  witb  tbg  migbt^  power;  anO  grant  tbat  tbis  Da^  we 
fall  into  no  sin,  neitber  run  into  an^  ftinD  of  Danger ;  but  tbat  all 
our  Doings  ma^  be  orDereD  b\>  tbs  governance,  to  Do  always  tbat  is 
rigbteous  in  tb^  sigbt ;  tbrougb  Jesus  Cbrist  our  XorD.*    Bmen. 

A  PRAYER  OF  ST.  CHRYSOSTOM. 

Blmigbts  0oD,  wbo  bast  given  us  grace  at  tbis  time  witb  one  ac* 
corD  to  make  our  common  supplications  unto  tbee;  anD  Dost  proms 
ise,  tbat  wben  two  or  tbree  are  gatbercD  togetber  in  tbs  Bame 
tbou  wilt  grant  tbeir  requests;  jfulfil  now,  O  5LorD,tbe  Desires  anD 
petitions  of  tbs  servants,  as  ma^  be  most  eipcDient  for  tbem; 
granting  us  in  tbis  worlD  ftnowleDge  of  tb^  trutb,  anD  in  tbe 
worlD  to  come  life  everlasting.    Bmen. 

1  Latin  Origin.     English  Usage,  A.  D.  1549. 

2  Ps.  li:  10,  II. 

3  Ancient  Origin.     Latin  and  English  Usage. 

^  Sacrementary  of  Gelasius,  A.  D.  494.     English  Usage,  A.  D.  1549. 
^  Sacrementary  of  Gregory,  A.  D.  590.     Ancient  Usage,  A.  D.  590. 


Catholic  Formularies.  231 

[  The  Order  for  Evensong  is  like  that  for  Matins  with  different  Canticles  and  in 
place  of  the  Collect  for  Grace  to  live  Well  the  following  .•] 

THE  THIRD  COLLECT,  FOR  AID  AGAINST  ALL   PERILS. 

Xigbten  out  Darhness,  \vc  bcseccb  tbcc,  O  XorD;  anJ)  bi?  tbg 
great  mcrcv?  DetenD  us  from  all  perils  an5  Daugcrs  of  tbfs  nigbt ;  for 
tbc  love  of  tbs  onlv>  Son,  our  Saviour,  Jesus  Cbrist.    2lmen.^ 

^bc  grace  of  our  XorJ)  Jesus  Cbrist,  anJ>  tbe  love  of  ©oO,  anD 
tbe  tellowsbip  of  tbe  Ibolg  Obost  be  vvitb  us  all  evermore.  Bmeu.- 

1  Sacramentary  of  Gelasius,  A.  D.  494.     Ancient  Usage. 

2  From  2  Cor.  xiii.     Apostolic.     Greek  Usage.     English,  1661. 


232  The  Historic  Liturgy. 


ITbe  Xitanp. 

A  General  Supplication,  to  be  sung  or  said  after  Morning  Prayer  upon  Sundays, 
Wednesdays,  and  Fridays,  and  at  other  times  when  it  shall  be  appointed. 

®  (5oC)  tbe  JFatber,  of  beaven :  bave  mcrcis  upon  us  miserable 
sinners/ 

O  God  the  Father,  of  heaven :  have  mercy  upon  us  miserable 
sinners.  ^ 

©  GoD  tbe  Son,  IReDeemer  of  tbe  worio :  bave  mercig  upon  us 
miserable  sinners.^ 

O  God  the  Son,  Redeemer  of  the  world  :  have  mercy  upon  us 
miserable  sinners.* 

©  (3oi)  tbe  1bol^  C5bOSt,  proceeding  from  the  Father  and  the  Son  : 
bave  mercg  upon  us  miserable  sinners.  ^ 

O  God  the  Holy  Ghost,  proceeding  from  the  Father  and  the 
Son  :   have  mercy  upon  us  miserable  sinners.  ® 

©  bol^,  blessed,  and  glorious  C^riuit^,  three  Persons  and  one  <2>QXi'. 
bave  nierc^  upon  us  miserable  sinners. ' 

©  bol>2,  blesseD,  anD  glorious  C:rinit\>,  tbree  ipersons  anO  one 
(3o5 :  bave  mcrc^  upon  us  miserable  sinners.' 

*IRemember  not,  XorD,  our  offences,  nor  tbe  offences  of  our  fore* 
fatbers ;  neitber  tafte  tbou  vengeance  of  our  sins :  spare  us,  good 
XorD,  spare  tbs  people,  wbom  tbou  bast  reDeemeD  vvitb  tbs  most 
precious  bloo&,  anD  be  not  angr^  witb  us  for  ever.^ 

Spare  us,  good  Xor&.^" 

3f  rom  all  evil  and  mischief ;  from  sin,  from  tbe  crafts  anO  assaults 
of  tbe  &evil;  from  tbs  wratb,  anD  from  everlasting  Damnation,  ^^ 

Good  XorD,  Deliver  us. 

^  Greek  Origin,  Latin  Usage.     Cranmer,  A.  D.  I544. 

2  The  Repetition  an  English  Usage,  A.  D.  1544. 

•''  Greek  Origin.     Latin  Usage.     Cranmer,  A.  D.  1 544. 

*  English  Usage,  A.  D.  1544.  ^  Greek  Origin.     Cranmer,  A.  D.  1544- 
«  English  Usage,  A.  D.  1544. 

^  Greek  Origin.     Latin  Usage.     Cranmer,  A.  D.  1544- 

*  English  Usage,  A.  D.  1544. 

9  Latin  Origin.     English  Usage,  A.  D.  1544. 

10  Latin  Origin  and  Usage.     Cranmer,  1544. 

11  Latin  Origin.     Eucer,  A.  D.,  1543.     Cranmer,  A.  D.  1544. 


Catholic  Formularies.  233 

From  all  blinDnces  of  beart ;  from  priOe,  vatnsglor^  anD  bgpocs 
r(ss ;  from  envB,  batrcD,  an&  malice,  anO  all  uncbaritableness/ 

Good  lorD,  Deliver  us. 

Ifrom  fornication  anJ)  all  otber  Dea&l^  sin ;  and  from  all  the  de- 
ceits of  the  world,  the  flesh,  and  the  devil, ^ 

Good  ILorD,  Deliver  us. 

3from  Ugbtning  anD  tempest ;  from  plague,  pestilence,  and  fa- 
mine \  from  battle  and  murder,  anD  from  suDOen  Deatb,' 

Good  XorO,  Deliver  us. 

From  all  sedition,  privy  conspiracy,  and  rebellion  ;  from  all  false 
doctrine,  heresy,  and  schism  ;  from  hardness  of  heart,  and  con- 
tempt of  thy  Word  and  Commandment,* 

Good  XorD,  Deliver  us. 

J6v>  tbe  masters  of  tb^  bols  Uncarnation  ;  bv  tb^  bol^  IRativitg 
anD  Circumcision;  bg  tbg  JBaptism,  jfasting  and  Temptation,^ 

Good  XorD,  Deliver  us. 

By  thine  Agony  and  bloody  Sweat ;  bg  tb^  Cross  anD  Ipassion ; 
bfi  tbs  precious  Deatb  and  Burial ;  bg  tb\>  Glorious  TResurrection 
anD  Ascension ;  anD  bg  tbe  coming  of  tbe  Ibol^  Gbost,« 

Good  XorD,  Deliver  us. 

In  all  time  of  our  tribulation  ;  in  all  time  of  our  wealth ;  in  tbe 
bour  of  Deatb,  anD  in  tbe  Da^  of  juDgement," 

Good  XorD,  Deliver  us. 

IXHe  sinners  Do  beseecb  tbee  to  bear  us,  O  Lord  God  ;  anD  tbat  it 
mas  please  tbee  to  rule  anD  govern  tb^  bolv  Cburcb  universal  in 
the  right  way  ;  ^ 

Tide  beseecb  tbee  to  bear  us,  good  Lord. 

That  it  may  please  thee  to  illuminate  all  Bishops,  Priests  and 
Deacons  with  true  knowledge  and  understanding  of   thy  Word  ; 

*  Latin  Origin.      Cranmer,  A.  D.  1544. 
2  Latin  Origin.     Cranmer,  A.  D.  1544. 

■  Bucer,  A.  D.  1543.     Cranmer,  1544.     Latin:  a subitanea et improvisa  morte. 

4  Buccr,  A.  D.  1543.     Craftmer  A.  D.  1544. 

5  Latin  Origin.  Bucer,  A.  D.  1543. 
s  Latin  Origin.  Bucer,  A.  D.  1543. 
'  Latin  Origin.     Bucer,  A.  D.  1543. 

*  Latin  Origin.     Cranmer  and  Bucer. 


234  '^^^^  Historic  Liturgy. 

and  that  both  by  their  preaching  and  living  they  may  set  it  forth 
and  show  it  accordingly  ;  ^ 

W.C  be0cecb  tbee  to  bear  ug,  good  XorD. 

That  it  may  please  thee  to  bless  the  Magistrates,  giving  them  grace 
to  execute  justice,  and  to  maintain  truth  ;  ^ 

Mc  bescecb  tbcc  to  bear  us,  good  XorJ). 

That  it  may  please  thee  to  give  to  all  nations  unity,  peace,  and 
concord  ;  * 

imc  beseecb  tbee  to  bear  us;  good  XorD. 

That  it  may  please  thee  to  give  us  an  heart  to  love  and  dread 
thee,  and  diligently  to  live  after  thy  commandments ;  * 

"Mc  beseecb  tbee  to  bear  us,  good  Xor&. 

That  it  may  please  thee  to  give  to  all  thy  people  increase  of 
grace  to  hear  meekly  thy  Word,  and  to  receive  it  with  pure  affec- 
tion, and  to  bring  forth  the  fruits  of  the  Spirit ;  ^ 

Me  beseecb  tbee  to  bear  us,  good  XorD. 

That  it  may  please  thee  to  bring  into  the  way  of  truth  all  such  as 
have  erred,  and  are  deceived  ;  * 

llCle  beseecb  tbee  to  bear  us,  good  XorD. 

That  it  may  please  thee  to  strengthen  such  as  do  stand  ;  and  to 
comfort  and  help  the  weak-hearted  ;  and  to  raise  up  them  that 
fall ;  and  finally  to  beat  down  Satan  under  our  feet ;  ' 

Tide  beseecb  tbee  to  bear  us,  good  XorD. 

That  it  may  please  thee  to  succour,  help,  and  comfort,  all  that 
are  in  danger,  necessity,  and  tribulation  ;  * 

W.Z  beseecb  tbee  to  bear  us,  good  XorD. 

That  it  may  please  thee  to  preserve  all  that  travel  by  land  or  by 
water,  all  women  labouring  of  child,  all  sick  persons,  and  young 
children  ;  and  to  shew  thy  pity  upon  all  prisoners  and  captives  ;  ® 

Tide  beseecb  tbee  to  bear  us,  good  XorD. 

1  Bucer  and  Cranmer,  A.  D.  1544.  ^  Bucer,  A.  D.  1543. 

*  English  Version.     Bucer,  A.  D.  1543.  *  Cranmer,  A.  D.  1544. 

*  Bucer,  Cranmer,  A.  D.  1544. 

6  Bucer,  A.  D.  1543.     Cranmer,  A.  D.  1544. 

"!  Bucer,  A.  D.  1543.  «  Bucer,  A.  D.  1543. 

8  Bucer,  A.  D.  1543,  and  Cranmer,  A.  D.  1544. 


Catholic  Formtdaries.  235 

That  it  may  please  thee  to  defend,  and  provide  for,  the  fatherless 
children,  and  widows,  and  all  that  are  desolate  and  oppressed  ;  ^ 

Me  bceeecb  tbcc  to  bear  us,  good  XorC). 

That  it  may  please  thee  to  have  mercy  upon  all  men  ;  ^ 

Tiae  beseecb  tbee  to  bear  us,  good  Xor&. 

That  it  may  please  thee  to  forgive  our  enemies,  persecutors,  and 
slanderers,  and  to  turn  their  hearts  ;  * 

Me  beseecb  tbee  to  bear  us,  good  XorJ). 

^bat  it  mas  please  tbee  to  give  auD  preserve  to  our  use  tbe  kindly 
fruits  of  tbe  eartb,  so  as  in  due  time  we  may  enjoy  them ;  * 

TSUe  beseecb  tbee  to  bear  us,  good  XorD. 

That  it  may  please  thee  to  give  us  true  repentance ;  to  forgive 
US  all  our  sins,  negligences,  and  ignorances  ;  and  to  endue  us  with 
the  grace  of  thy  Holy  Spirit  to  amend  our  lives  according  to  thy 
holy  Word  ;  " 

XOe  beseecb  tbee  to  bear  us,  good  XorO. 

Son  of  (3o£) :  we  beseecb  tbee  to  bear  us. 

Son  of  (3oD :  we  beseecb  tbee  to  bear  us. 

0  Xamb  of  ©oD :  tbat  taftest  awa^  tbe  sins  of  tbe  worl5 ; 

©rant  us  tbs  peace. 

©  Xamb  of  (3oD :  tbat  taftest  awag  tbe  sins  of  tbe  vvorlD ; 

Ibave  meres  upon  us. 

©  Cbrist,  bear  us. 

©  Cbrist,  bear  us. 

XorD,  bave  meres  upon  us, 

XorD,  bave  meres  upon  us. 

Cbrist,  bave  meres  upon  us. 

Cbrist,  bave  meres  upon  us. 

XorD,  bave  meres  upon  us. 

XorD,  bave  meres  upon  us."^ 

Priest.     ©  XorD,  Deal  not  witb  us  after  our  sins. 

Answer.    Beitber  rewarD  us  after  our  iniquities. 

Xet  us  pras. 
©  0oD,  merciful  jfatbcr,  tbat  Despisest  not  tbe  sigbing  of  a  con* 
trite  beart,  nor  tbe  Desire  of  sucb  as  be  sorrowful ;  /Iftercifulls  as= 


1  Bucer,  A.  D.  1543  and  Cranmer,  A.  D.  1544.  2  Bucer,  A.  D.  1543. 

*  Bucer,  A.  D.  1543.  *  Latin  Origin.     Cranmer,  A.  D.  1544. 

5  Latin  Origin.     Cranmer,  A.  D.  1544- 
«  Lesser  Litany.     Latin  Origin.     Bucer,  A.  D.  1543. 


236  The  Historic  Lituj^gy. 

sist  our  praisers  tbat  we  mahe  before  tbee  in  all  out  troubles  anD 
adversities,  wbensoever  tbes  oppress  us ;  anO  graciously  bear  us, 
tbat  tbose  evils,  wbicb  tbe  craft  anD  subtilts  of  tbe  5evil  or  man 
worftetb  against  us,  be  brougbt  to  nougbt;  anD  b^  tbe  providence 
of  tb^  gooOness  tbe^  ma^  be  dispersed ;  tbat  we  tbs  servants,  bes 
ing  burt  b^  no  persecutions,  mag  evermore  give  tbanfts  unto  tbee 
in  tbs  Ibols  Gburcb ;  tbrougb  Jesus  Cbrist  our  Xord.^ 

©  ILorD,  arise,  belp  us,  and  Deliver  us  for  tb^  IRame's  safte. 

©  (3o&,  we  bave  bearD  witb  our  ears,  and  our  fatbcrs  bave  &es 
clarcD  unto  us,  tbe  noble  worfts  tbat  tbou  Didst  in  tbeir  Da^js,  anD 
in  tbe  olD  time  before  tbcm. 

©  ILorD,  arise,  belp  us,  anD  Deliver  us  for  tbine  bonour. 

(3lorg  be  to  tbe  S'atber,  anD  to  tbe  Son :  anD  to  tbe  fbol^  ©bost ; 

Answer.  Bs  it  was  in  tbe  beginning,  is  now,  anD  ever  sball  be : 
worlD  witbout  cw'^.    2lmen. 

3From  our  enemies  DefenD  us,  ©  Cbrist. 

©raciousls  looh  upon  our  afflictions. 

IPitifuUs  bebolD  tbe  sorrows  of  our  bearts. 

^ercifulls  forgive  tbe  sins  of  tbg  people.     , 

3Favourabl^  witb  merc^  bear  our  praters, 

O  Son  of  2)aviD,  bave  mcrc^  upon  us. 

:©otb  now  anD  ever  voucbsafe  to  bear  us,  ©  Cbrist. 

6raciouslB  bear  us,  ©  Cbrist ;  graciously  bear  us,  ©  XorD  Cbrist. 

Priest.    ®  XorD,  let  tb^  mcrc^  be  sbevveD  upon  us ; 

Answer.    Bs  wc  Do  put  our  trust  \\\  tbee. 2 

Xet  us  pra^. 

Wiz  bumble  beseecb  tbee,  ©  jFatber,  mercifully  to  looft  upon  our 
infirmities ;  anD  for  tbe  glorg  of  tbv  1Hame  turn  from  us  all  tbose 
evils  tbat  we  most  rigbteousl^  bave  DeserveD ;  anD  grant,  tbat  in 
all  our  troubles  we  ma^  put  our  wbole  trust  anD  confiDence  in  tb^ 
meres,  anD  evermore  serve  tbee  in  boliness  anD  pureness  of  living, 
to  tb)5  bonour  anD  glorg;  tbrougb  ouronlg^eDiator  anD  BDvocate, 
5esu3  Cbrist  our  XorD.    Bmen.^ 

2  Coy.  xiii. 

^be  grace  of  our  XorD  5esus  Cbrist,  anD  tbe  love  of  <5oD,  anD 
tbe  fellowsbip  of  tbe  Ibolg  ©bost,  be  witb  us  all  evermore. 
Bmen.* 


^  Modem  Usage.   Bucer,  1543.  ^  Ancient  Origin.    Cranmer,  A.  D.,  1554. 

5  English  Usage.     A.  D.,  1549.  *  English  Usage.  Since  R.  Elizabeth. 


CatJiolic  Formularies.  237 


XTbe  Supper  of  tbe  Xor&,  Ibol^  Communion 
commonli>  called  tbe  /iDass. 

The  Table,  at  the  Couimjinion-tiDie  having  a  fair  zvJiitc  linen  cloth  upon  it,  shall 
sta>id  in  the  Body  of  the  Church,  or  in  the  Chancel,  where  Alorning  and 
Evening  Prayer  are  appointed  to  be  said.  And  the  Priest  shall  say  the  Lord's 
Prayer,  with  the  Collect  following,  the  people  kneeling. 

©ur  3f  atbcr,  wbicf)  art  In  beaven,  fballoweCt  be  tb^  IRame.  ^bv> 
ftinc^^omcomc.  ^bs  will  be  C>one  In  eartb,  B0  tt  (s  \\\  beaven.  ©ive 
U3  tbis  Das  our  Dallv?  breaO.  HnD  forgive  us  our  trespasses,  Bs  we 
forgive  tbem  tbat  trespass  against  us.  BnD  leaO  us  not  into  temp* 
tation ;  JSut  Deliver  us  from  evil.    Bmen. 

THE  COLLECT.  1 

Zllmigbtv  0oO,  unto  wbom  all  bearts  be  open,  all  Desires  ftnown, 
anD  from  wbom  no  secrets  are  biD;  Cleanse  tbe  tbougbts  of  our 
bearts  bg  tbe  inspiration  of  tb\>  Ibol^  Spirit,  tbat  we  ma'5  per= 
fectl^  love  tbee,  anD  wortbil\>  magnify  tbs  bols  IRame ;  tbrougb 
Cbrist  our  XorO.    2lmen. 

Then  shall  be  said  or  sung  the  Introit  or  Proper  Psalm  of  the  day,  together  with 
the  Gloria  Patri."^ 

II  Will  wasb  me  banDs  in  innocence,  ©  XorD :  anD  so  will  H  go  to 
tbine  altar ; 

Q^bat  II  mav  sbew  tbe  vqxzz  of  tbanftsgiving  :  anD  tell  of  all  tbe 
wonDrous  works. 

XorD,  H  bave  loveD  tbe  babitation  of  tbe  bouse :  anD  tbe  place 
wbere  tbine  bonour  Dvvelletb. 

After  which  shall  be  said  or  sung, 

XorD,  bave  merce  upon  us.^ 
Cbrist,  bave  merce  upon  us. 
XorD,  bave  merce  upon  us. 

And  then  shall  be  sung,  all  standing,  Gloria  in  Excelsis.  ^ 

©lore  be  to  QQ'b  on  bigb,  anD  iw  eartb  peace,  gooD  will  towards 
men.  'Uae  praise  tbee,  we  bless  tbee,  we  worsbip  tbee,  v;e  glorife 
tbee,  we  give  tbanhs  to  tbee  for  tbe  great  glore,  ©  XorD  ©oD, 
beavenle  Iking,  ©oD  tbe  ifatber  aimigbte. 


1  Ancient:   English  Usage,  1549. 

2  Catholic  and  Lutheran  usage:   Anglican,  1549:  omitted  by  Cranmer,  1552. 

*  Primitive  Hymn  :    Catholic  and  Lutheran  usage  :   transferred  by  Cranmer  to 
Post-Communion. 


238  The  Historic  Liturgy. 

®  XorD,  tbe  on[ie=bcgotten  Son  5esus  Cbrist;  O  XocD  (5oD, 
ILamb  of  Q)QX>,  Son  ot  tbe  3fatber,  tbat  taftcst  avva^  tbe  sins  ot  tbe 
worlD,  bavc  merc^  upon  us.  ^bou  tbat  taftest  awai5  tbe  sins  qI 
tbe  worlD,  bave  mercg  upon  us.  ilbou  tbat  tafiest  awa^  tbe  sins 
ot  tbe  worlD,  receive  our  pragcr.  ^bou  tbat  sittest  at  tbe  rigbt 
band  of  (3oD  tbe  3Fatber,  bave  nierc^  upon  us. 

3for  tbou  onrg  art  bolv? ;  tbou  onl\2  art  tbe  1Lor5 :  tbou  onl^,  © 
Cbrist,  witb  tbe  1bol^  ©bost,  art  most  bigb  in  tbe  glor^  of  (3oD  tbe 
jfatber.    Bnien. 

The7i  shall  be  said  the  Collect  of  the  Day.  And  immediately  after  the  Collect  the 
Priest  shall  read  the  Epistle.  And  the  Epistle  ended,  then  shall  he  7-ead  the 
Gospel. 

Here  shall  be  said  or  siing, 

Olorg  be  to  tbee,  ©  %ov^J 

And  the  Gospel  etided,  shall  be  sung  or  said  the  Creed  follozving,"^  the  people  still 
standing,  as  before. 

■ff  believe  in  one  (3oD  tbe  jfatber  Blmigbtv,  /iftafter  of  beaven  anD 
eartbt  BnD  of  all  tbings  visible  anD  invisible : 

BnJ>  in  one  XorD  5esu6  Cbrist,  tbe  onls=begotten  Son  of  GoD, 
:fi3ec50tten  of  bis  ifatber  before  all  worlds,  GoS  of  GoD,  Xigbt  of 
Xigbt,  Deris  Q>q^  of  ver^  <2><i^,  JSegotten,  not  maDe,  JBeing  of  one 
substance  witb  tbe  J'atber ;  :©g  wbom  all  tbings  were  ma&e :  IGlbo 
for  us  men,  anD  for  our  salvation  came  Down  from  beaven,  BnD 
was  incarnate  b^  tbe  Ibol^  Gbost  of  tbe  IDirgin  /Ilbar^,  BnD  was 
maDe  man,  BnD  was  crucifieC)  also  for  us  unDer  ipontius  Ipilate. 
Ibe  sutfcreD  anD  was  buried,  BnD  tbe  tbirD  Da^g  be  rose  again  ac== 
corMng  to  tbe  Scriptures,  Bn&  ascenDcD  into  beaven,  BnD  sittetb 
on  tbe  rigbt  banD  of  tbe  S'atber.  BnD  be  sball  come  again  witb 
glor^  to  judge  botb  tbe  quich  anD  tbe  DeaD :  llBlbose  l^ingDom  sball 
bave  no  en&. 

But)  IT  believe  in  tbe  1bol^  Gbost,  Q;be  ILorD  an&  Giver  of  Xife, 
Mbo  proceeSetb  from  tbe  3fatber  anD  tbe  Son,  Mbo  witb  tbe 
jfatber  anO  tbe  Son  togetber  is  worsbippeD  anD  glorifieD,  llGlbo 
spal^e  b^  tbe  propbets.  BnD  11  believe  one  Catbolicft  anD  Bposs 
tolicft  Cburcb.  IF  acl^nowlcDge  one  asaptism  for  tbe  remission  of 
sins,  BnD  H  look  for  tbe  IResurrection  of  tbe  DeaD,  BnD  tbe  life  of 
tbe  worlD  to  come.   Bmcn. 

Then  the  Minister  shall  declare  unto  the  people  what  Holy-days,  or  Easting-days, 
are  in  the  Week  following  to  be  observed,  and  then  shall  follow  the  Sermon. 

^  Primitive  Ascription  :  Catholic  usage  :  omitted  by  Cranmer,  1552:  Adopted 
in  American  liturgy,  17S9. 

2  Ancient  Eucharistic  Confession  :  Alternative  with  the  Apostles'  Creed  in 
American  liturgy. 


Catholic  Formularies.  239 

Then  shall  the  Priest  return  to  the  Lord^ s  Table,  and  begin  the  Offertory,  saying 
one  or  more  of  these  Sentences  following,  as  he  thinketh  most  convenient  in  his 
discretion . 

Let  your  light  so  shine  before  men,  that  they  may  see  your  good 
works,  and  glorify  your  Father  which  is  in  heaven.     Sf.  Matth.  v. 

Lay  not  up  for  yourselves  treasure  upon  the  earth ;  where  the 
rust  and  moth  doth  corrupt,  and  wliere  thieves  break  through  and 
steal ;  but  lay  up  for  yourselves  treasures  in  heaven  ;  where  neither 
rust  nor  moth  doth  corrupt,  and  where  thieves  do  not  break  through 
and  steal.     St.  Matth.  vi. 

Whatsoever  ye  would  that  men  should  do  unto  you,  even  so  do 
unto  them  ;  for  this  is  the  Law  and  the  Prophets.  St.  Matth.  vii. 
*********** 

While  these  Sentences  are  in  reading,  the  Deacons,  Church-zvardens,  or  other  fit 
person  appointed  for  that  purpose,  shall  receive  the  Alms  for  the  Poor,  and 
other  devotiotis  of  the  people. 

And  the  Priest  shall  then  place  upon  the  Table  so  much  Bread  and  Wine,  as  he 
shall  think  sufficient.     After  which  done,  the  Priest  shall  say, 

Xift  up  gour  bearts.i 

Answer.     IXIle  Utt  tbem  up  unto  tbe  XorD. 
Priest.     Xct  US  give  tbanfts  unto  our  XorO  (3o&.^ 
Answer.     Ht  is  meet  anD  rigbt  so  to  Do. 

Then  shall  the  Priest  turn  to  the  Lord^s  Table,  and  say, 

1ft  is  ver^  meet,  rigbt,  anD  our  boun&en  Dut^,  tbat  we  sboul5  at 
all  times,  an&  in  all  places,  ciive  tbanl^s  unto  tbee,  ©  XorO,  Ibolg 
jfatber,  Blmigbtis;  ;i£verlasting  ©oD.^ 

Here  shall  follow  the  Proper  Preface,  according  to  the  time,  if  there  be  any  speci- 
ally appointed;  or  else  immediately  shall  follow, 

tTberefore  witb  angels  anD  2lrcbangels,  an&  witb  all  tbe  com= 
pan^  ot  beaven,  we  lauC)  anD  magnitg  tbg  glorious  IRame ;  ever* 
more  praising  tbee,  anJ)  saving,  Ibol^,  bolt?,  bolis,  XorD  (3o£)  oX 
bosts,  beaven  anO  eartb  are  full  ot  tb^  glor\> :  ©lor^  be  to  tbee,  © 
XorO  most  Ibigb.    Bmen.^ 

PROPER  PREFACES.  2 
Upon  Christmas  Day,  and  seven  days  after. 

:fl3ecause  tbou  DiDst  give  Jesus  Cbrist  tbine  onlg  Son  to  be  born 

^  The  Sursum  Corda,  Versicles  and  Tersanctus  were  in  all  ancient  liturgies. 
2  Catholic:  except  for  Christmas  day  and  Whit  Sunday,  1849. 


240  The  Historic  Liturgy. 

as  at  tbts  time  for  us ;  wbo,  b^  tbc  operation  ot  tbe  Ibol^  ©bost^ 
was  maDe  ver^j  man  of  tbe  substance  of  tbe  IDirgin  /llbar^  bis 
motber ;  an&  tbat  witbout  spot  of  sin,  to  make  us  clean  from  all 
sin.    ^berefore  vvitb  Bngels,  etc. 

upon  Easter  Day,  and  seven  days  after. 

:©ut  cbiefls  are  we  bounD  to  praise  tbee  for  tbe  glorious  TResur* 
rection  of  tbs  Son  Jesus  Cbrist  our  XorD ;  for  be  is  tbe  verg 
Ipascbal  Xamb,  wbicb  was  offered  for  us,  anD  batb  taken  awas  tbe 
sin  of  tbe  worlD ;  wbo  bv>  bis  Deatb  batb  &estrov>e£)  Deatb,  and  bs 
bis  rising  to  life  again  batb  restored  to  us  everlasting  life.  Q^bere* 
fore  witb  Bngels,  etc. 

upon  Ascettsion  Day,  and  seven  days  after. 

G:brougbtbg  most  dearly  beloved  Son  Jesus  (3brist  our  ILord: 
wbo  after  bis  most  glorious  IResurrection  manifestly  appeared  to 
all  bis  Bpostles,  and  \xi  tbcir  sigbt  ascended  up  into  beaven  to  pre* 
pare  a  place  for  us ;  tbat  wbere  be  is,  tbitber  we  migbt  also  as* 
cend,  and  reign  witb  bim  in  glorv?.    ^berefore  witb  Hngels,  etc. 

upon  Whit  Sunday,  and  six  days  after. 

^brougb  Jesus  Cbrist  our  Xord ;  according  to  wbose  most  true 
promise,  tbe  Ibol^  ©bost  came  down  as  at  tbis  time  from  beaven 
witb  a  sudden  great  sound,  as  it  bad  been  a  migbtg  wind,  \\\  tbe 
likeness  of  fierv?  tongues,  ligbting  upon  tbe  Bpostles,  to  teacb 
tbem,  and  to  lead  tbem  to  all  trutb ;  giving  tbem  botb  tbe  gift  of 
divers  languages,  and  also  boldness  witb  fervent  3eal  constantly 
to  preacb  tbe  Oospel  unto  all  nations;  wberebs  we  bave  ^szzxi 
brougbt  out  of  darkness  and  error  into  tbe  clear  ligbt  and  true 
knowledge  of  tbee,  and  of  tb^  Son  Jesus  Cbrist.  ^berefore  witb 
Bngels,  etc. 

upon  the  Feast  of  Trinity  only. 

TlClbo  art  one  (Bod,  one  Xord;  not  one  onls  Person,  but  tbree 
IPersons  in  one  Substance,  ^or  tbat  wbicb  we  believe  of  tbe  glor^ 
of  tbe  jfatber,  tbc  same  we  believe  of  tbe  Son,  and  of  tbe  Ibol^ 
©bost,  witbout  an^  difference  or  inequalitig.  tTberefore  witb 
Bngels,  etc. 

After  each  of  zvhich  Preface:  shall  immediately  be  sung  or  said, 

Q:berefore  witb  Bngels  and  Brcbangels,  and  witb  all  tbe 
company)  of  beaven,  we  laud  and  magnify?  tb^  glorious  1i4ame; 
evermore  praising  tbee,  and  saving,  Ibol^,  bols,  bolv,  Xord  ©od 
of  bosts,  beaven  and  eartb  are  full  of  tbg  glor^ ;  ©lor^  be  to  tbee^ 
©  Xord  most  bigb.    Bmcn. 


CatJiolic  Formnlaries.  241 

When  the  Priest  standing  before  the  Titble,  hath  so  ordered  the  Bread  and  Wine, 
that  he  may  'with  the  more  readiness  and  decency  break  the  Bread  before  the 
people,  and  take  the  Cup  into  his  hands,  he  shall  say  the  Prayer  of  Consecra- 
tion, as  folhnueth.  ^ 

Almighty  God,  our  heavenly  Father,  who  of  thy  tender  mercy 
didst  give  thine  only  Son  Jesus  Christ  to  suffer  death  upon  the 
Cross  for  our  redemption  ;  who  made  there  (by  his  one  oblation 
of  himself  once  offered)  a  full,  perfect,  and  sufficient  sacrifice,  ob- 
lation, and  satisfaction,  for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world ;  and  did 
institute,  and  in  his  holy  Gospel  command  us  to  continue,  a  per- 
petual memory  of  that  his  precious  death,  until  his  coming  again  ; 
Hear  us,  O  merciful  Father,  we  most  humbly  beseech  thee  ;  and 
grant  that  we  receiving  these  thy  creatures  of  bread  and  wine,  ac- 
cording to  thy  Son  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ's  holy  institution,  in 
remembrance  of  his  death  and  passion,  may  be  partakers  of  his 
most  blessed  Body  and  Blood,  who,  in  the  same  night  that  he  was 
betrayed,  took  Bread  ;  and,  when  he  had  given  thanks,  he  brake 
it,  and  gave  it  to  his  disciples,  saying.  Take,  eat,  this  is  my  Body 
which  is  given  for  you :  Do  this  in  remembrance  of  me.  Like- 
wise after  supper  he  took  the  Cup ;  and  when  he  had  given 
thanks,  he  gave  it  to  them,  saying.  Drink  ye  all  of  this  ;  for  this 
is  my  Blood  of  the  New  Testament,  which  is  shed  for  you  and  for 
many  for  the  remission  of  sins  :  Do  this,  as  oft  as  ye  shall  drink  it, 
in  remembrance  of  me.  ^ 

Mbercfore,  ©  OLorO  anD  bcavcnls  IFatbcr,  wc,  tbs  bumble  ser* 
vants,  5o  celebrate  auD  mafte  bere  before  tb^  Divine  /Dbajest^,  witb 
tbese  tb^  bolg  gifts,  tbe  memorial  tb\?  Son  batb  commanDeD  us  to 
mafte ;  baving  in  remembrance  bis  blesseC)  passion  anC)  precious 
Deatb,  bis  migbt^  resurrection  anD  glorious  ascension;  anD  ren= 
Dering  unto  tbee  most  beart^  tbanfts  for  tbe  innumerable  benefits 
procured  unto  us  bs  tbe  same.  BnD  we  entirely  Desire  tb^ 
fatberl^  gooDness  mercifully  to  accept  tbis  our  sacrifice  of  praise 
an&  tbanksgiving ;  most  bumble  bescccbing  tbcc  to  grant,  tbat  bp 
tbe  merits  anD  Dcatb  of  tbs  Son  Jesus  Cbrist,  anD  tbrougb  faitb 
in  bis  blooD,  we  anD  all  tbs  wbole  dburcb  mag  obtain  remission  of 

1  In  1549,  here  followed  the  Prayer  for  the  Church  MiHtant  (see  p.  249,  below), 
as  part  of  the  Canon  of  Consecration.  In  1552,  it  was  placed  by  Cranmer  in 
the  Ante-Communion,  where  it  is  still  used. 

^  Based  upon  the  Canon  by  Cranmer :    More  Protestant  than  Catholic. 
i6 


242  The  Historic  Li  tier gy. 

our  5lns,  anD  all  otbcr  benefits  of  bis  passion.  Bn5  bere  we  offer 
and  present  unto  tbee,  ©  XorD,  ourselves,  our  souls  auD  bodies, 
to  be  a  reasonable,  bols,  anO  lively  sacrifice  unto  tbee ;  bumble 
beseecbing  tbee,  tbat  all  we,  wbo  are  partafters  of  tbis  bol^  Com* 
munion,  ma^  be  fulfilled  witb  tb^  grace  and  beavenlig  benediction. 
Bnd  altbougb  we  be  unwortb^,  tbrougb  our  manifold  sins,  to  offer 
unto  tbee  ang  sacrifice,  ^et  we  beseecb  tbee  to  accept  tbis  our 
bounden  dut^  and  service ;  not  weigbing  our  merits,  but  pardoning 
our  offences,  tbrougb  Sesus  Cbrist  our  Xord  ;  b^  wbom,  and  witb 
wbom,  in  tbe  unit\>  of  tbe  1bol^  (Bbost,  all  bonour  and  glor\j  be  unto 
tbee,  ©  jfatber  Blmigbt^,  world  witbout  end.    Bmcn.^ 

The7t  shall  the  Priest  say  the  Lord's  Prayer,  the  people  repeating  after  him  every 
Petition . 

Then  shall  the  Minister  first  receive  the  Commnnion  in  both  kinds  himself,  and 
then  proceed  to  deliver  the  same  to  the  Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons,  in  like 
manner  {if  any  be  present) ,  and  after  that  to  the  people  also  in  order,  into 
their  hands,  all  tneekly  kneeling.  And,  when  he  delivereth  the  Bread  to  any 
one,  he  shall  say, 

^be  :Bod\>  of  our  Xord  Sesus  Cbrist,  wbicb  was  given  for  tbee, 
preserve  tbs  bods  and  soul  unto  everlasting  life.^ 

Take  and  eat  this  in  remembrance  that  Christ  died  for  thee,  and 
feed  on  him  in  thy  heart  by  faith  with  thanksgiving. 

And  the  Minister  that  delivereth  the  Cup  to  any  one  shall  say, 

Z\iZ  JBlood  of  our  Xord  Jesus  Cbrist,  wbicb  was  sbed  for  tbee, 
preserve  tb\>  bods  and  soul  unto  everlasting  life.^ 

Drink  this  in  remembrance  that  Christ's  Blood  was  shed   for 

thee,  and  be  thankful. 

When  all  have  communicated,  the  Minister  shall  return  to  the  Lord's  Table,  and 
revei-ently  place  upon  it  what  remaineth  of  the  consecrated  Elements,  covering 
the  satne  with  a  fair  linen  cloth. 

And  after  a  Hymn  has  been  sung  shall  be  said  this  Thanksgiving.^ 

Almighty  and  everliving  God,  we  most  heartily  thank  thee,  for 
that  thou  dost  vouchsafe  to  feed  us,  who  have  duly  received  these 
holy  mysteries,  with  the  spiritual  food  of  the  most  precious  Body 
and  Blood  of  thy  Son  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ ;  and  dost  assure 
us  thereby  of  thy  favour  and  goodness  towards  us  ;  and  that  we 


1  Amendment  of  Laud :    More  Catholic  than  Protestant  :    adopted  in  Scottish 
and  American  liturgies. 

2  Catholic  forms,  with  Protestant  additions  by  Cranmer. 

3  By  Bucer  and  Cranmer,  1552. 


CatJiolic  Fonimlaries.  243 

are  very  members  incorporate  in  the  mystical  body  of  thy  Son,  and 
which  is  the  blessed  company  of  all  faithful  people ;  and  are  also 
heirs  through  hope  of  thy  everlasting  kingdom,  by  the  merits  of 
the  most  precious  death  and  passion  of  thy  dear  Son.  And  we 
most  humbly  beseech  thee,  O  heavenly  Father,  so  to  assist  us  with 
thy  grace,  that  we  may  continue  in  that  holy  fellowship,  and  do 
all  such  good  works  as  thou  hast  prepared  for  us  to  walk  in  ; 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  to  whom,  with  thee  and  the  Holy 
Ghost,  be  all  honour  and  glory,  world  without  end.     Amen. 

Then  the  Priest  (or  Bishop  if  he  be  present )  shall  let  them  depart  with  this  Blessing.  ^ 

The  peace  of  God,  which  passe th  all  understanding,  keep  your 
hearts  and  minds  in  the  knowledge  and  love  of  God,  and  of  his  Son 
Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  ;  and  the  blessing  of  God  Almighty,  the 
Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  be  amongst  you  and  remain 
with  you  always.     Amen. 

^  By  Bucer  and  Cranmer,  1552. 


244  '^^^^  Histoi^ic  Liturgy. 


THE    ORDER   FOR   DIVINE   SERVICE    ON   THE 

LORD'S   DAY. 

At  the  beginning  of  Divine  Service  on  the  Lord'' s  Day'^  the  Alinister  shall 
read  with  a  loud  voice  some  one  or  more  of  these  Sentences  of  the  Scrip- 
tures that  follow.  And  then  he  shall  say  that  which  is  written  after  the 
said  Sentences. 

When  the  wicked  man  turneth  away  from  his  wickedness  that  he 
hath  committed,  and  doeth  that  which  is  lawful  and  right,  he  shall 
save  his  soul  alive.     Ezek.  xviii.  27. 

I  acknowledge  my  transgressions,  and  my  sin  is  ever  before  me. 
Psal.  li.  3. 

Hide  thy  face  from  my  sins,  and  blot  out  all  mine  iniquities. 
Psal.  li.    9. 

The  sacrifices  of  God  are  a  broken  spirit :  a  broken  and  a  con- 
trite heart,  O  God,  thou  wilt  not  despise.     Psal.  li.  17. 

Rend  your  heart,  and  not  your  garments,  and  turn  unto  the 
Lord  your  God  :  for  he  is  gracious  and  merciful,  slow  to  anger, 
and  of  great  kindness,  and  repenteth  him  of  the  evil.  Joel. 
ii.  13. 

To  the  Lord  our  God  belong  mercies  and  forgivenesses,  though 
we  have  rebelled  against  him  :  neither  have  we  obeyed  the  voice 
of  the  Lord  our  God,  to  walk  in  his  laws  which  he  set  before  us. 
Dan.  ix.    9,  10. 

0  Lord,  correct  me,  but  with  judgement ;  not  in  thine  anger, 
lest  thou  bring  me  to  nothing.     Jer.  x.  24.     Psal.  vi.  i. 

Repent  ye ;  for  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  is  at  hand.  St. 
Matth.  iii.  2. 

1  will  arise,  and  go  to  my  father,  and  will  say  unto  him.  Father, 
I  have  sinned  against  heaven,  and  before  thee,  and  am  no  more 
worthy  to  be  called  thy  son.     St.  Luke  xv.  18,  19. 

Enter  not  into  judgement  with  thy  servant,  O  Lord  ;  for  in  thy 
sight  shall  no  man  living  be  justified.     Psal.  cxliii.  2. 

If  we  say  that  we  have  no  sin,  we  deceive  ourselves,  and  the 


^  Calvinistic  Usage :  Genevan  "  Form  of  Common  Prayers,"  printed  by 
Whitechurch,  printer  of  the  Prayer-book,  June  3,  1550.  Pollanus,  1550.  English 
Usage,  A.  D.,  1552. 


Protestant  Formularies .  245 

truth  is  not  in  us  :  but,  if  we  confess  our  sins,  he  is  faithful  and 
just  to  forgive  us  our  sins,  and  to  cleanse  us  from  all  unrighteous- 
ness.     I  St.  Jolm  i.  8,  9. 

Dearly  beloved  brethren,  the  Scripture  moveth  us  in  sundry- 
places  to  acknowledge  and  confess  our  manifold  sins  and  wicked- 
ness ;  and  that  we  should  not  dissemble  nor  cloke  them  before  the 
face  of  Almighty  God  our  heavenly  Father  ;  but  confess  them  with 
an  humble,  lowly,  penitent,  and  obedient  heart ;  to  the  end  that 
we  may  obtain  forgiveness  of  the  same,  by  his  infinite  goodness 
and  mercy.  And  although  we  ought  at  all  times  humbly  to 
acknowledge  our  sins  before  God ;  yet  ought  we  most  chiefly  so 
to  do,  when  we  assemble  and  meet  together  to  render  thanks 
for  the  great  benefits  that  we  have  received  at  his  hands,  to  set 
forth  his  most  worthy  praise,  to  hear  his  most  holy  Word,  and  to 
ask  those  things  which  are  requisite  and  necessary,  as  well  for  the 
body  as  the  soul.  Wherefore  I  pray  and  beseech  you,  as  many  as 
are  here  present,  to  accompany  me  with  a  pure  heart,  and  humble 
voice,  unto  the  throne  of  the  heavenly  grace,  saying  after  me;^ 

A  General  Confession'''  to  be  said  of  the  whole  Congregatio?t  after  the  Minister,  all 
kneeling. 

Almighty  and  most  merciful  Father ;  We  have  erred,  and  strayed 
from  thy  ways  like  lost  sheep.  We  have  followed  too  much  the 
devices  and  desires  of  our  own  hearts.  We  have  offended  against 
thy  holy  laws.  We  have  left  undone  those  things  which  we  ought 
to  have  done ;  And  we  have  done  those  things  which  we  ought  not 
to  have  done ;  And  there  is  no  health  in  us.  But  thou,  O  Lord, 
have  mercy  upon  us,  miserable  offenders.  Spare  thou  them,  O 
God,  which  confess  their  faults.  Restore  thou  them  that  are  peni- 
tent ;  According  to  thy  promises  declared  unto  mankind  in  Christ 

1  Calvinistic  Usage :  Calvin's  Strasburg  Liturgy  translated  for  Church  of  Refu- 
gees in  Glastonbury  Abbey,  with  a  Brief  Apology  for  this  Liturgy  by  Valerandus 
Pollanus,  February  23,  155 1.      English  Compilers,  A.  D.,  1552. 

2  Calvinistic  Usage  at  Geneva,  A.  D. ,  1541,  and  Su-asburg,  A.  D.,  1538  ;  at 
Glastonbury,  A.  D.,  1550  ;  and  in  London,  A.  D.,  1550,  according  to  the  "  Form 
of  Church  Service,"  modeled  upon  Calvin's  Liturgy  by  John  a  Lasco  with  per- 
mission of  Edward  VL 


246  The  Historic  Liturgy. 

Jesus  our  Lord.  And  grant,  O  most  merciful  Father,  for  his  sake ; 
That  we  may  hereafter  live  a  godly,  righteous,  and  sober  life,  To 
the  glory  of  thy  holy  Name.     Amen.^ 

The   Absolutiott,'^  or  Jiemissioti  of  sins,  to  be  pronottnced  by  the  Minister  alone, 
statiding;  the  people  still  kneeling. 

Almighty  God,  the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who 
desireth  not  the  death  of  a  sinner,  but  rather  that  he  may  turn 
from  his  wickedness,  and  live ;  and  hath  given  power,  and  com- 
mandment, to  his  Ministers,  to  declare  and  pronounce  to  his  people, 
being  penitent,  the  Absolution  and  Remission  of  their  sins :  He 
pardoneth  and  absolveth  all  them  that  truly  repent,  and  unfeignedly 
believe  his  holy  Gospel.  Wherefore  let  us  beseech  him  to  grant  us 
true  repentance,  and  his  Holy  Spirit,  that  those  things  may  please 
him,  which  we  do  at  this  present ;  and  that  the  rest  of  our  life  here- 
after may  be  pure,  and  holy ;  so  that  at  the  last  we  may  come  to 
his  eternal  joy ;  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.  ^     Amen. 

Then  the  Minister  shall  kneel,  and  say  the  Lord'' s  Prayer  ;  the  people  also  kneel- 
ing, and  repeating  it  zuith  him. 

Our  Father,  which  art  in  heaven.  Hallowed  be  thy  Name.  Thy 
kingdom  come.  Thy  will  be  done  in  earth,  As  it  is  in  heaven. 
Give  us  this  day  our  daily  bread.  And  forgive  us  our  trespasses, 
As  we  forgive  them  that  trespass  against  us.  And  lead  us  not  into 
temptation  ;  But  deliver  us  from  evil :  For  thine  is  the  kingdom, 
The  power,  and  the  glory.  For  ever  and  ever.     Amen. 

\_Then  shall  he  sung,  all  standing,  a  Psalm,  as  following']. 
PSALM  cm.      Benedic,  anima  mea. 

Praise  the  Lord,  O  my  soul :  and  all  that  is  within  me  praise  his 
holy  Name. 

Praise  the  Lord,  O  my  soul :   and  forget  not  all  his  benefits ; 
Who  forgiveth  all  thy  sin  :   and  healeth  all  thine  infirmities  ; 

^  Composed  by  Cranmer  and  other  Compilers,  1552- 

*  Calvinistic  Doctrine;  Institutes,  Bk.  iv,  Ch.  i,  §22;  Bk.  iii,  Cli.  iv,  ^14, 
A.  D.  1536.     Calvinistic  Usage  at  Strasburg,  1538,  Glastonbury  and  London,  1550. 

3  Compiled  from  a  Form  in  Calvinistic  Liturgy  of  John  a  Lasco,  by  Cranmer 
and  Compilers. 


Protestant  Formularies.  247 

Who  saveth  thy  life  from  destruction  :  and  crowneth  thee  with 
mercy  and  loving-kindness ; 

O  praise  the  Lord,  ye  angels  of  his,  ye  that  excel  in  strength: 
ye  that  fulfil  his  commandment,  and  hearken  unto  the  voice  of  his 
words. 

O  praise  the  Lord,  all  ye  his  hosts  :  ye  servants  of  his  that  do 
his  pleasure. 

O  speak  good  of  the  Lord,  all  ye  works  of  his,  in  all  places  of 
his  dominion  :   praise  thou  the  Lord,  O  my  soul. 

Then  shall  be  read  a  Lesson  taken  out  of  the  Old  Testament.  After  -which 
the  Minister  shall  rehearse  distinctly  all  the  TEN  COMMAND- 
M E  N  TS ;  ^  and  the  people  kneeling  shall,  after  every  Coinviandiiient, 
ask  God  mercy  for  their  transgression  thereof  for  the  titne  past,  and  grace  to 
keep  the  same  for  the  time  to  come,  as  follozueth. 

Minister.  God  spake  these  words,  and  said  ;  I  am  the  Lord  thy 
God  :   Thou  shalt  have  none  other  gods  but  me. 

People.  ILorD,  bave  mcrc^  upon  us,  and  incline  our  hearts  to 
keep  this  law.^ 

Minister.  Thou  shalt  not  make  to  thyself  any  graven  image, 
nor  the  likeness  of  anything  that  is  in  heaven  above,  or  in  the 
earth  beneath,  or  in  the  water  under  the  earth.  Thou  shalt  not 
bow  down  to  them,  nor  worship  them  :  for  I  the  Lord  thy  God  am 
a  jealous  God,  and  visit  the  sins  of  the  fathers  upon  the  children, 
unto  the  third  and  fourth  generation  of  them  that  hate  me,  and 
shew  mercy  unto  thousands  in  them  that  love  me,  and  keep  my 
commandments. 

People.  XorD,  bavc  mercg  upon  us,  and  incline  our  hearts  to 
keep  this  law. 

Minister.  Thou  shalt  not  take  the  Name  of  the  Lord  thy  God 
in  vain  ;  for  the  Lord  will  not  hold  him  guiltless,  that  taketh  his 
Name  in  vain. 

People.  XorD,  bavc  merc^  upon  us,  and  incline  our  hearts  to 
keep  this  law. 

Minister.  Remember  that  thou  keep  holy  the  Sabbath-day. 
Six  days  shalt  thou  labour,  and  do  all  that  thou  hast  to  do ;  but 

^  Calvinistic  usage  at  Geneva,  Strasburg,  Glastonbun'  and  London.  Pollanus, 
1551- 

*  The  Catholic  Lesser  Litany  with  Protestant  additions,  A.  D.  1552. 


248  The  Historic  Liturgy. 

the  seventh  day  is  the  Sabbath  of  the  Lord  thy  God.  In  it  thou 
shalt  do  no  manner  of  work,  thou,  and  thy  son,  and  thy  daughter, 
thy  man-servant,  and  thy  maid-servant,  thy  cattle,  and  the  stranger 
that  is  within  thy  gates.  For  in  six  days  the  Lord  made  heaven  and 
earth,  the  sea,  and  all  that  in  them  is,  and  rested  the  seventh  day : 
wherefore  the  Lord  blessed  the  seventh  day,  and  hallowed  it. 

People.  XorD,  bave  meres  upon  110,  and  incline  our  hearts  to 
keep  this  law. 

Minister.  Honour  thy  father  and  thy  mother;  that  thy  days 
may  be  long  in  the  land,  which  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee. 

People.  Xor5,  bave  merc^  upon  us,  and  incline  our  hearts  to 
keep  this  law. 

Minister.     Thou  shalt  do  no  murder. 

People.  1Lor5,  bavc  meres  upon  us,  and  incline  our  hearts  to 
keep  this  law. 

Minister.     Thou  shalt  not  commit  adultery. 

People.  XorO,  bave  meres  upon  us,  and  incline  our  hearts  to 
keep  this  law. 

Minister.     Thou  shalt  not  steal. 

People.  XorD,  bave  meres  upon  us,  and  incline  our  hearts  to 
keep  this  law. 

Minister.  Thou  shalt  not  bear  false  witness  against  thy  neigh- 
bour. 

People.  Xor£),  bave  meres  upon  us,  and  incline  our  hearts  to 
keep  this  law. 

Minister.  Thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbour's  house,  thou 
shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbour's  wife,  nor  his  servant,  nor  his  maid, 
nor  his  ox,  nor  his  ass,  nor  anything  that  is  his. 

People.  XorD,  bave  meres  upon  us,  and  write  all  these  thy  laws 
in  our  hearts,  we  beseech  thee.^ 

Then  shall  be  read  a  Lesson  taken  out  of  the  A^ew  Testamejit.  \_After  which 
the  Alinister  shall  pronounce  the  Eight  Beatitudes  or  Blessings  of  the  Gospel, 
and  the  People  standing  shall,  after  every  Blessing,  declare  the  reason  given 
for  the  same  as  folloT.veth'\.  ^ 

And  Jesus  opened  his  mouth  and  taught  his  disciples,  saying : 


^  Summary  Petition  in  Liturgy  of  Pollanus. 

2  Proposed  Prayer-book  A.  D.  1682.      Presbyterian,  Unitarian  and  Episcopal 
suggestion. 


Protesta7it  Forimdaries.  249 

Blessed  are  the  poor  in  spirit : 

People.     For  theirs  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

Minister.     Blessed  are  they  that  mourn  : 

People.     For  they  shall  be  comforted. 

Minister.      Blessed  are  the  meek  : 

People.     For  they  shall  inherit  the  earth. 

Minister.  Blessed  are  they  which  do  hunger  and  thirst  after 
righteousness  : 

People.     For  they  shall  be  iiUed. 

Minister.     Blessed  are  the  merciful  : 

People.     For  they  shall  obtain  mercy. 

Minister.     Blessed  are  the  pure  in  heart : 

People.     For  they  shall  see  God. 

Minister.     Blessed  are  the  peace-makers  : 

People.     For  they  shall  be  called  the  children  of  God. 

Minister.  Blessed  are  they  which  are  persecuted  for  righteous- 
ness' sake  : 

People.     For  theirs  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

And  then  the  Minister  and  People,  still  standing,  shall  say  the  Apostles'  Creed. 

I  Believe  in  God  the  Father  Almighty,  Maker  of  heaven  and 
earth  : 

And  in  Jesus  Christ  his  only  Son  our  Lord  ;  Who  was  conceived 
by  the  Holy  Ghost,  Born  of  the  Virgin  Mary  ;  Suffered  under 
Pontius  Pilate,  Was  crucified,  dead  and  buried  ;  He  descended 
into  hell.  The  third  day  he  rose  from  the  dead ;  He  ascended  into 
heaven,  And  sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of  God  the  Father  Almighty ; 
From  thence  he  shall  come  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead. 

I  believe  in  the  Holy  Ghost ;  The  Holy  Catholic  Church  ;  The 
Communion  of  Saints  ;  The  Forgiveness  of  sins  ;  The  Resurrec- 
tion of  the  body  ;  And  the  Life  everlasting.     Amen. 

The?t,  if  the  Holy  Communion  is  to  follow,  shall  the  Minister  say  : 

Let  US  pray  for  the  whole  state  of  Christ's  Church  militant  here 
in  earth.  ^ 


^  Knox's  Book  of  Common  Order.     Amended  according  to  Bucer's  Censura, 
A.  D.  1552. 


250  The  Historic  Liturgy, 

Almighty  and  everliving  God,  who  by  thy  holy  Apostle  hast 
taught  us  to  make  prayers,  and  supplications,  and  to  give  thanks, 
for  all  men  ;  We  humbly  beseech  thee  most  mercifully  to  receive 
these  our  prayers,  which  we  offer  unto  thy  Divine  Majesty  ;  be- 
seeching thee  to  inspire  continually  the  universal  Church  with  the 
spirit  of  truth,  unity,  and  concord  :  And  grant,  that  all  they  that 
do  confess  thy  holy  Name  may  agree  in  the  truth  of  thy  holy 
Word,  and  live  in  unity,  and  godly  love.  We  beseech  thee  also 
to  save  and  defend  all  Christian  Kings,  Princes,  and  Governors  ; 
and  especially  thy  Servant  [our  chief  magistrate]  ;  And  grant  unto 
all  that  are  put  in  authority,  that  they  may  truly  and  indifferently 
minister  justice,  to  the  punishment  of  wickedness  and  vice,  and  to 
the  maintenance  of  thy  true  religion,  and  virtue.  Give  grace,  O 
heavenly  Father,  to  all  Bishops  and  [Ministers],  that  they  may 
both  by  their  life  and  doctrine  set  forth  thy  true  and  lively  Word, 
and  rightly  and  duly  administer  thy  holy  sacraments  :  And  to  all 
thy  people  give  thy  heavenly  grace ;  and  especially  to  this  congre- 
gation here  present :  that,  with  meek  heart  and  due  reverence, 
they  may  hear,  and  receive  thy  holy  Word  ;  truly  serving  thee  in 
holiness  and  righteousness  all  the  days  of  their  life.  And  we  most 
humbly  beseech  thee  of  thy  goodness,  O  Lord,  to  comfort  and 
succour  all  them,  who  in  this  transitory  life  are  in  trouble,  sorrow, 
need,  sickness,  or  any  other  adversity.  And  we  also  bless  thy  holy 
Name  for  all  thy  servants  departed  this  life  in  thy  faith  and  fear  ; 
beseeching  thee  to  give  us  grace  so  to  follow  their  good  examples, 
that  with  them  we  may  be  partakers  of  thy  heavenly  kingdom  : 
Grant  this,  O  Father,  for  Jesus  Christ's  sake,  our  only  Mediator 
and  Advocate.^     Amen. 

Or  else  these  Prayeis  following,  together  with  any  special  Prayers  or  Thanks- 
givings upon  sez<eral  occasions  which  may  be  requisite  and  fitting. 

A  PRAYER  FOR  ALL  CONDITIONS  OF  MEN.^ 
O  God,  the  Creator  and   Preserver  of  all  mankind,  we  humbly 


1  Protestant  emendation  of  Catholic  Canon  of  the  Mass  by  Cranmer,  in   1st 
Bk.  of  Edward. 

2  Bishop  Sanderson  or  Bishop  Gunning,  A.  D.,  1661.     Due  to  Presbyteriaa 
Revision. 


Protestant  Formularies.  251 

beseech  thee  for  all  sorts  and  conditions  of  men  ;  that  thou  would- 
est  be  pleased  to  make  thy  ways  known  unto  them,  thy  saving 
health  unto  all  nations.  More  especially  we  pray  for  the  good  es- 
tate of  the  Catholick  Church  ;  that  it  may  be  so  guided  and  gov- 
erned by  thy  good  Spirit,  that  all  who  profess  and  call  themselves 
Christians  may  be  led  into  the  way  of  truth,  and  hold  the  faith  in 
unity  of  spirit,  in  the  bond  of  peace,  and  in  righteousness  of  life. 
Finally,  we  commend  to  thy  fatherly  goodness  all  those,  who  are 
any  ways  afflicted,  or  distressed,  in  mind,  body,  or  estate;  \es- 
pecially  those  for  wJioin  our  prayers  are  desired^  that  it  may 
please  thee  to  comfort  and  relieve  them,  according  to  their  sev- 
eral necessities,  giving  them  patience  under  their  sufferings,  and 
a  happy  issue  out  of  all  their  afflictions.  And  this  we  beg  for 
Jesus  Christ  his  sake.     Amen. 

A  PRAYER  FOR   THE  CHIEF   MAGISTRATE   AND  ALL   IN  AU- 
THORITY, i 

O  Lord,  our  heavenly  Father,  high  and  mighty  King  of  kings, 
Lord  of  lords,  the  Blessed  and  only  Potentate,  who  dost  from  thy 
throne  behold  all  the  dwellers  upon  earth  ;  Most  heartily  we  be- 
seech thee  with  thy  favor  to  behold  [thy  chosen  servant  our  Chief 
Magistrate,  his  counsellors  and  all  others  in  authority]  ;  and  so 
replenish  them  with  the  grace  of  thy  Holy  Spirit,  that  they  may 
always  incline  to  thy  will,  and  walk  in  thy  way.  Endue  them 
plenteously  with  heavenly  gifts  ;  grant  them  in  health,  [peace,  and 
godliness]  to  rule  ;  and  finally,  after  this  life,  to  attain  everlasting 
joy  and  felicity  ;  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.     Amen. 

A  PRAYER  FOR  THE  CLERGY  AND  PEOPLE.  2 

Hlmigbts  an&  everlasting  (SoO,  wbo  alone  worftest  great  marvels; 
SenD  Oown  upon  our  JSisbops,  [and  other  Ministers],  an&  all  Gons 
gregations  committed  to  tbcir  cbarge,  tbe  bealtbful  Spirit  of  tb^ 
grace ;  an&  tbat  tbeg  ma^  trulv?  please  tbee,  pour  upon  tbem  tbe 
continual  &ew  of  tbv  blessing.  Grant  tbis  ©  lLor&,  for  tbe  bonour 
of  our  BDvocate  anD  /IReDiator,  Jesus  Cbrist.    Bmen. 

^   Early  Reformed.      English  usage  till  1661. 

2  Ancient  Collect.      Amended  in  1641  and  16S9. 


252  The  Historic  Liturgy. 

A  GENERAL  THANKSGIVING.  ^ 
Almighty  God,  Father  of  all  mercies,  we  thine  unworthy  ser- 
vants do  give  thee  most  humble  and  hearty  thanks  for  all  thy  good- 
ness and  loving-kindness  to  us,  and  to  all  men  ;  [^particularly  to 
those  who  desire  now  to  offer  tip  their  praises  and  thanksgivings  for 
thy  late  tnercies  vouchsafed  unto  the?n.~\  We  bless  thee  for  our 
creation,  preservation,  and  all  the  blessings  of  this  life  ;  but  above 
all,  for  thine  inestimable  love  in  the  redemption  of  the  world  by 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  for  the  means  of  grace,  and  for  the  hope 
of  glory.  And,  we  beseech  thee,  give  us  that  due  sense  of  all 
thy  mercies,  that  our  hearts  may  be  unfeignedly  thankful,  and  that 
we  shew  forth  thy  praise,  not  only  with  our  lips,  but  in  our  lives ; 
by  giving  up  ourselves  to  thy  service,  and  by  walking  before  thee 
in  holiness  and  righteousness  all  our  days  ;  through  Jesus  Christ 
our  Lord,  to  whom  with  thee  and  the  Holy  Ghost  be  all  honour 
and  glory,  world  without  end.     Atnen. 


A  PRAYER  THAT  MAY  BE  SAID  AFTER  ANY  OF  THE  FORMER. 

Blmfgbti?  (3o&,  wbo  bast  promised  to  bear  tbc  petitions  of  tbcm 
tbat  asft  in  tb^  Son's  IRame;  Time  beseecb  tbee  mercifully  to 
incline  tbine  ears  to  us  tbat  bave  ma&e  now  our  praters  anD 
supplications  unto  tbee ;  anD  grant,  tbat  tbose  things,  wbicb  we 
bav>e  faitbfullB  asftcO  according  to  tbi2  will,  nia^  etfectuallig  be 
obtained,  to  tbe  relief  of  our  necessity,  an&  to  tbe  setting  fortb  of 
tbB  glors ;  tbrougb  S^esus  Cbrist  our  XorO.^    Bmen. 

And  after  the  Prayers  shall  follow  a  Hymn  and  the  Sermon.  And  the  Sermon 
ended,  then  shall  be  said  this  Collect'^,  or  some  suitable  Prayer,  with  the 
£enedictio7i. 

Grant,  we  beseech  thee.  Almighty  God,  that  the  words,  which 
we  have  heard  this  day  Avith  our  outward  ears,  may  through  thy 
grace  be  so  grafted  inwardly  in  our  hearts,  that  they  may  bring 
forth  in  us  the  fruit  of  good  living,  to  the  honour  and  praise  of 
thy  Name ;  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.     Amen. 


1  The  Presbyterian  Bishop  Reynolds.      A.  D.  1661. 

2  Ancient  Collect.      English  Usage. 
*  English  Reformed,  1549. 


Protestant  Fo7nnula7'ies.  253 

The  peace  of  God,  which  passeth  all  understanding,  keep  your 
hearts  and  minds  in  the  knowledge  and  love  of  God,  and  of  his 
Son  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord :  And  the  Blessing  of  God  Almighty, 
the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  be  amongst  you,  and 
remain  with  you  always.     Amen. 


2  54  T^^^^  Historic  Liturgy 


THE  ORDER  OF  PREPARATION  FOR  THE  LORD'S 

SUPPER. 

When  the  Minister  giveth  warning;  for  the  celebration  of  the  holy  Communion 
(7vhich  he  shall  always  do  upon  the  Sunday,  or  some  Holy-day,  immediately 
preceding),  after  the  Sertnon  or  Homily  ended,  he  shall  read  this  Exhortation 
following.  ^ 

Dearly  beloved,  on  —  day  next  I  propose,  through  God's  as- 
sistance, to  administer  to  all  such  as  shall  be  religiously  and  de- 
voutly disposed  the  most  comfortable  Sacrament  of  the  Body  and 
Blood  of  Christ ;  to  be  by  them  received  in  remembrance  of  his 
meritorious  Cross  and  Passion  ;  whereby  alone  we  obtain  remis- 
sion of  our  sins,  and  are  made  partakers  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

^  ^  ;!;  -^  *  t-  *  *  ;>; 

And  because  it  is  requisite,  that  no  man  should  come  to  the  holy 
Communion,  but  with  a  full  trust  in  God's  mercy,  and  with  a  quiet 
conscience ;  therefore  if  there  be  any  of  you,  who  by  this  means 
cannot  quiet  his  own  conscience  herein,  but  requireth  further  com- 
fort or  counsel,  let  him  come  to  me,  or  to  some  other  discreet  and 
learned  Minister  of  God's  Word,  and  open  his  grief;  that  by  the 
ministry  of  God's  holy  Word  he  may  receive  the  benefit  of  abso- 
lution, together  with  ghostly  counsel  and  advice,  to  the  quieting 
of  his  conscience,  and  avoiding  of  all  scruple  and  doubtfulness.  ^ 

Or,  in  case  he  shall  see  the  people  negligent  to  come  to  the  holy  Communion,  in- 
stead of  the  former,  he  shall  use  this  Exhortation.^ 

Dearly  beloved  brethren,  on I  intend,  by  God's  grace, 

to  celebrate  the  Lord's  Supper:  unto  which,  in  God's  behalf,  I 
bid  you  all  that  are  present ;  and  beseech  you,  for  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ's  sake,  that  ye  will  not  refuse  to  come  thereto,  being  so  lov- 
ingly called  and  bidden  by  God  himself. 
^^  *  ^  *  *  *  ** 


1  Calvinistic  Usage.  From  Cologne  Liturgy  or  Hermann's  Consultation,  A. 
D.  1543,  "a  quasi- Lutheran  production  of  Melanchthon  and  Bucer."  Inserted 
in  English  "Order  of  Communion"  in  1848;  sent  to  Calvin  for  approval. 
Knox's  Book  of  Common  Order. 

2  Calvin's  Institutes,  Book  III,  Chapter  iv,  |  14.     Revisions  of  1552  and  1661. 

3  Peter  Martyr. 


Protesta7it  For7nularies.  255 

At  the  time  of  the  celebration  of  the  Communion  the  Minister  may  say  this  Ex- 
hortation. * 

Dearly  beloved  in  the  Lord,  ye  that  mind  to  come  to  the  holy 
Communion  of  the  Body  and  Blood  of  our  Saviour  Christ,  must 
consider  how  Saint  Paul  exhorteth  all  persons  diligently  to  try  and 
examine  themselves,  before  they  presume  to  eat  of  that  Bread,  and 

drink  of  that  Cup. 

^;  ;!;  *  i(.  *  *  *  *  * 

Then  shall  the  Minister  say  to  them  that  come  to  receive  the  holy  Communion.  ^ 

Ye  that  do  truly  and  earnestly  repent  you  of  your  sins,  and  are 
in  love  and  charity  with  your  neighbours,  and  intend  to  lead  a  new 
life,  following  the  commandments  of  God,  and  walking  from 
henceforth  in  his  holy  ways ;  Draw  near  with  faith,  and  take  this 
holy  Sacrament  to  your  comfort ;  and  make  your  humble  confes- 
sion to  Almighty  God,  meekly  kneeling  upon  your  knees. 

Then  shall  this  general  Confession  be  made,  in   the  name  of  all  those  that  are 
minded  to  receive  the  holy  Communion,  by  one  of  the  Ministers.'^ 

Almighty  God,  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  Maker  of  all 
things,  Judge  of  all  men  ;  We  acknowledge  and  bewail  our  mani- 
fold sins  and  wickedness.  Which  we,  from  time  to  time,  most 
grievously  have  committed,  By  thought,  word,  and  deed.  Against 
thy  Divine  Majesty,  Provoking  most  justly  thy  wrath  and  indigna- 
tion against  us.  We  do  earnestly  repent,  And  are  heartily  sorry  for 
these  our  misdoings;  The  remembrance  of  them  is  grievous  unto 
us ;  The  burden  of  them  is  intolerable.  Have  mercy  upon  us, 
Have  mercy  upon  us,  most  merciful  Father ;  For  thy  Son  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ's  sake,  Forgive  us  all  that  is  past;  And  grant 
that  we  may  ever  hereafter  serve  and  please  thee  In  newness  of  life, 
To  the  honour  and  glory  of  thy  Name  ;  Through  Jesus  Christ  our 
Lord.     Amen. 

Then  shall  the  Minister  (or  the  Bishop,  being  present^  pronounce  this  Absolution.^ 

Almighty  God,  our  heavenly  Father,  who  of  his  great  mercy 

1  Calvinistic.  Composed  by  Peter  Martyr.  Suggested  by  Bucer  and  Knox. 
Presbyterian  Revision,  l66l. 

2  English  order  of  Communion.     Lutheran  and  Calvinistic. 

3  Calvinistic,  Pollanus.     English  Reformed. 

*  Catholic.     Protestant  amended.     Lutheran  and  Calvinistic. 


256  The  Historic  Lititrgy. 

hath  promised  forgiveness  of  sins  to  all  them  that  with  hearty  re- 
pentance and  true  faith  turn  unto  him  ;  Have  mercy  upon  you ; 
pardon  and  deliver  you  from  all  your  sins;  confirm  and  strengthen 
you  in  all  goodness ;  and  bring  you  to  everlasting  life ;  through 
Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.     Amen. 

Then  shall  the  Minister  say, '^ 

Hear  what  comfortable  words  our  Saviour  Christ  saith  unto  all 
that  truly  turn  to  him. 

Come  unto  me  all  that  travail  and  are  heavy  laden,  and  I  will 
refresh  you.     St.  Matth.  xi.  28. 

So  God  loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son,  to 
the  end  that  all  that  believe  in  him  should  not  perish,  but  have 
everlasting  life.     St.  John  ni.  16. 

Hear  also  what  Saint  Paul  saith. 

This  is  a  true  saying,  and  worthy  of  all  men  to  be  received, 
that  Christ  Jesus  came  into  the  world  to  save  sinners,    i  Tim.  i.  15. 

Hear  also  what  Saint  John  saith. 

If  any  man  sin,  we  have  an  Advocate  with  the  Father,  Jesus 
Christ  the  righteous ;  and  he  is  the  propitiation  for  our  sins,  i  St. 
John  ii.  I. 

Then  shall  the  Minister  say  in  the  name  of  all  thetn  that  shall  receive  the  Com- 
vmnioti  this  Prayer  following.'^ 

We  do  not  presume  to  come  to  this  thy  Table,  O  merciful  Lord, 
trusting  in  our  own  righteousness,  but  in  thy  manifold  and  great 
mercies.  We  are  not  worthy  so  much  as  to  gather  up  the  crumbs 
under  thy  Table.  But  thou  art  the  same  Lord,  whose  property  is 
always  to  have  mercy :  Grant  us  therefore,  gracious  Lord,  so  to 
eat  the  flesh  of  thy  dear  Son  Jesus  Christ,  and  to  drink  his  blood, 
that  our  sinful  bodies  may  be  made  clean  by  his  body,  and  our 
souls  washed  through  his  most  precious  blood,  and  that  we  may 
evermore  dwell  in  him,  and  he  in  us.     Amen. 

And  then  shall  follow  the  Ministration. 

1  Calvinistic  usage  at  Geneva.      Strasburg  Liturgy. 

2  Protestant.      English  Order  of  Communion.      Bucer  and  Cranmer. 


IX. 


THE    SOCIOLOGICAL    QUESTION    OF 
CHURCH   UNITY. 


IX. 
THE  SOCIOLOGICAL  QUESTION  OF  CHURCH  UNITVy 

"  How  were  Christians  employed,"  said  Voltaire,  "  whilst 
the  Saracens  were  ravaging  the  fairest  portion  of  Christen- 
dom ?  Disputing  whether  Christ  had  one  will  or  two ! " 
The  sneer  was  shallow  enough  ;  but  it  seems  almost  deserved 
when  we  weigh  the  forgotten  Monothelite  controversy  against 
that  Christian  civilization  which  was  in  peril  until  after  the 
Crusades.  Perhaps,  too,  we  may  find  history  repeating  itself 
in  our  own  time. 

The  situation  of  the  Christian  denominations  in  modern 
society  is  not  unlike  that  of  a  wrangling  army  among  invad- 
ing foes.  It  is  not  a  petty  quarrel  before  the  onset,  but  a  bitter 
feud  in  mid-battle.  The  contending  factions  have  become  so 
absorbed  that  they  do  not  even  see  the  hosts  mustering 
around  them  and  the  ranks  closing  in  upon  them.  Worst  of 
all,  they  have  neither  organization  nor  leadership  in  their 
hour  of  peril. 

Meanwhile,  too,  may  still  be  heard  the  old  Voltairian  sneer 
with  modern  variations :  "  You  Christians  are  disputing 
whether  the  Holy  Ghost  proceeds  from  the  Father  as  well  as 
the  Son,  whilst  multitudes  have  not  even  heard  if  there  be  a 
Holy  Ghost ;  whether  any  infants  have   been  elected  from 


1  This  essay  appeared  in  the  Century  Magazine  for  1890,  as  one  of  the  series 
of  Present  Day  Papers  issued  under  the  supervision  of  a  Sociological  Group  com- 
posed of  the  Right  Rev.  Henry  C.  Potter,  Prof.  Charles  \V.  Shields,  Rev.  Dr. 
Theodore  T.  Munger,  Rev.  Dr.  Wm.  Chauncy  Langdon,  Rev.  Dr.  Samuel  W. 
Dike,  President  Scth  Low,  Prof.  Richard  T.  Ely,  Right  Rev.  Hugh  Miller 
Thompson,  Prof.  Charles  A.  Briggs,  Rev.  Dr.  Washington  Gladden,  Prof. 
Francis  G.  Peabody,  President  William  F.  Slocum,  Jr.,  The  Hon.  Edward  J. 
Phelps,  Prof.  William  J.  Sloane,  and  Charles  Dudley  Warner,  Esq. 

259 


26o  The  Sociological  Question. 

eternity,  whilst  myriads  of  infants  are  growing  up  in  vice  and 
sin  ;  whether  the  heathen  on  the  other  side  of  the  globe  will 
hereafter  be  saved,  whilst  the  heathen  at  your  own  doors  are 
already  lost.  You  are  splitting  hairs  of  theology,  with  society 
falling  to  pieces  around  you.  If  this  be  Christianity,  we  want 
none  of  it.  Settle  your  useless  disputes  and  unite  vigorously 
in  improving  the  world  that  now  is,  and  then  we  will  listen 
to  your  promises  of  a  better  world  to  come." 

The  writer  would  be  no  alarmist  in  his  view  of  the  social 
necessities  for  church  unity.  But  surely,  if  social  ills  are  fast 
coming  to  a  crisis,  it  is  folly  to  ignore  them  ;  and  if  organized 
Christianity  is  their  only  perfect  remedy,  it  is  madness  to 
withhold  that  remedy.  The  Church  would  simply  be  a  con- 
spicuous failure  did  not  it  thus  become  the  light  of  the  world 
and  the  salt  of  the  earth.  To  instruct  and  preserve  society  is 
at  least  one  design,  if  not  the  chief  design,  of  the  Christian 
religion  as  organized  in  the  Church.  Whatever  other  great 
purposes  it  may  serve  as  a  training-school  of  individuals  for 
heaven,  it  has  also  this  high  social  mission  here  upon  earth. 
And  with  this  social  mission  of  Christianity  we,  in  our  collec- 
tive capacity,  have  mainly  to  do. 

It  should  be  remembered  that  our  social  troubles  are  not 
wholly  economic  or  political  in  their  nature.  The  problems 
of  marriage,  temperance,  education,  property,  involve  moral 
elements.  Even  the  so-called  conflict  between  labor  and 
capital  is  no  mere  play  of  impersonal  forces,  but  also  a  fierce 
struggle  of  human  passions  and  prejudices,  and  the  actors  in 
it  cannot  be  manipulated  like  so  many  chessmen  in  the  game 
of  politics.  In  fact,  our  wisest  statesmanship  already  stands 
baffled  before  these  problems.  They  have  passed  beyond  the 
control  of  parties,  the  machinery  of  legislation,  and  the  de- 
vices of  political  economy.  It  is  becoming  plain  that  they 
are  not  to  be  solved  by  divorce  statutes,  prohibitory  amend- 
ments, conspiracy  laws  against  strikes  and  boycotts;  much 
less  by  improved  police  systems  and  new  barricade  tactics. 
If  solved  at  all,  the  solution  must  be  largely  moral  and  even 


Early  Christian  Socialism.  261 

religious,  striking  at  the  roots  of  social  corruption  in  ignor- 
ance and  vice  ;  imparting  integrity  to  all  classes;  binding  to- 
gether laborer  and  capitalist  in  bonds  of  charity  as  well  as 
interest ;  and  ever  nobly  diffusing  culture  with  wealth,  virtue 
with  intelligence,  religion  with  knowledge,  Christianity  with 
civilization. 

From  this  high  point  of  view  the  Christian  religion  has  an 
imperious  claim  upon  the  patriot  and  the  statesman.  Even 
that  citizen  who  does  not  accept  it  must  recognize  it  as  at 
least  part  of  our  national  life  and  a  potent  force  in  public 
affairs.  If  he  should  choose  to  view  it  simply  as  a  moraliz- 
ing agent,  aside  from  all  religious  doctrines,  it  would  still 
have  an  immense  political  value.  Compared  with  other 
religions,  it  would  afford  the  best  political  morality  that  the 
world  has  ever  known.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  we  are 
neither  an  infidel  nor  a  heathen  people.  Our  whole  civiliza- 
tion is  essentially  Christian.  Our  institutions  and  laws  have 
their  roots  in  Christian  ethics.  The  very  seat  of  our  sover- 
eignty is  in  a  Christian  citizenship.  The  most  unscrupulous 
politician  dare  not  defy  the  Christian  sentiment  of  the  nation. 
The  most  philosophic  statesman  cannot  afford  to  ignore  it. 
And  the  time  may  not  be  far  off  when  the  organization  of  the 
Christian  denominations  against  menacing  social  evils — in 
other  words,  church  unity — shall  have  become  a  social  as  well 
as  an  ecclesiastical  question,  and  a  question  belonging  to  the 
domain  of  practical  rather  than  mere  sentimental  politics. 
This  will  be  seen  more  clearly  as  we  proceed  to  trace  the 
historical  relations  of  socialism  with  Christianity  to  their 
present  critical  stage  in  this  country. 

Early  Christian  Socialism, 
Socialism  originated  in  Christianity.  It  was  born  in  the 
golden  age  of  the  Church,  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  when  "  the 
multitude  of  them  that  believed  were  of  one  heart  and  of  one 
soul  ;  neither  said  any  of  them  that  ought  of  the  things  which 
he  possessed  was  his  own  ;  but  they  had  all  things  common. 


262  The  Sociological  Question. 

Neither  was  there  any  among  them  that  lacked  ;  for  as  many 
as  were  possessors  of  lands  or  houses  sold  them,  and  brought 
the  prices  of  the  things  that  were  sold,  and  laid  them  down  at 
the  apostles'  feet ;  and  distribution  was  made  unto  every  man 
according  as  he  had  need."  That  brief  brilliant  dream  of 
social  perfection  has  lingered  ever  since  in  the  Christian  con- 
sciousness as  an  ideal  of  prayer  and  effort.  Countless  attempts 
have  been  made  to  realize  it,  many  of  them  crude  and  gro- 
tesque, but  some  of  them  noble  and  hopeful.  The  monastic 
communities  of  the  early  church,  both  Greek  and  Roman,  the 
great  religious  orders  of  the  Middle  Ages,  the  Benedictines, 
the  Dominicans,  the  Franciscans,  with  their  various  branches, 
were  only  so  many  socialistic  organizations  based  upon  the 
renunciation  of  property,  marriage  and  citizenship.  Com- 
munistic sects  were  born  of  the  pentecostal  zeal  of  the  Refor- 
mation ;  some  of  them,  like  the  German  Anabaptists  and 
English  Fifth  Monarchists,  assailing  both  church  and  state 
with  revolutionary  violence,  whilst  others,  like  the  Shakers 
and  Harmonists,  sought  an  asylum  in  the  New  World  and 
founded  peaceful  retreats  of  piety  and  virtue.  Besides  these 
imported  forms  of  Christian  socialism  we  have  had  our  own 
indigenous  growth,  such  as  the  Unitarian  Association  of  Trans- 
cendentalists  at  Brock  Farm  and  the  Orthodox  Community 
of  Perfectionists  at  Oneida.  And  now,  as  mild  types  of  the 
same  spirit,  we  have  in  some  of  our  churches  revived  brother- 
hoods and  sisterhoods  with  voluntary  vows  of  poverty,  celi- 
bacy and  charity. 

Not  only  has  socialism  prevailed  within  the  Church,  but  its 
offshoots  have  flourished  like  the  wild  olive  beyond  the  pale, 
if  not  as  direct  fruits  of  Christianity,  yet  as  products  of  a 
Christian  civilization.  The  various  eleemosynary  institutions 
for  the  relief  of  social  ills — hospitals,  asylums,  reformatories, 
penitentiaries — were  once  managed  by  the  clergy  alone,  and 
may  all  be  traced  back  to  the  example  and  doctrine  of  that 
divine  Philanthropist  who  taught  the  parable  of  the  Good 
Samaritan  and  wrought  miracles  of  healing  upon  the  bodies 


Early   Christian  Socialism.  263 

as  well  as  souls  of  men.  The  numerous  friendly  and  benefi- 
ciary societies  for  mutual  help  in  sickness  and  misfortune, 
such  as  the  Free  Masons,  the  Odd  Fellows,  the  Knights  of 
Pythias,  etc.,  are  only  remote  descendants  of  the  Christian 
guild,  and  often  born  of  the  Christian  spirit,  even  when  not 
baptized  with  a  Christian  name.  Propagandist  orders,  like 
the  Sons  of  Temperance  and  the  Brethren  of  the  White 
Cross,  aim  directly  at  Christian  virtues.  Many  of  the  modern 
schemes  of  social  regeneration  have  simply  borrowed  the 
Christian  ideas  of  liberty,  equality,  fraternity,  charity.  Saint- 
Simon  styled  his  socialistic  treatise  "  New  Christianity."  It 
is  often  claimed  that  industrial  fraternities  are  doing-  the  work 
of  a  practical  Christianity.  To  Christianity,  indeed,  the  work- 
ing classes  owe  their  enfranchisement  and  their  organization. 
The  pagan  world  knew  nothing  of  the  dignity  of  free  labor. 
In  no  heathen  land  has  the  toiler  ceased  to  be  a  slave,  or  a 
serf,  or  a  mere  drudge  and  outcast.  In  Christian  nations 
alone,  have  associations  of  workingmen  for  their  own  im- 
provement and  elevation,  such  as  trades  unions,  and  Knights 
of  Labor,  become  possible.  Even  the  Anarchist  owes  to  a 
Christian  State  the  free  arm  with  which  he  is  now  blindly 
striking  back  at  the  mother  which  nourished  him. 

It  would  be  interesting  to  trace  historically  the  process  by 
which  such  socialism  has  become  alienated  from  the  churcli 
and  even  from  Christianity  itself,  and  to  survey  its  existing 
forms  in  different  European  countries,  such  as  French  com- 
munism, German  social  democracy,  Russian  nihilism,  and 
international  anarchism.  At  present,  however,  we  need  only 
take  into  view  the  amalgamated  product  as  we  find  it  in  our 
own  country.  No  easy  task  will  it  be  to  sift  the  confused 
materials  of  American  socialism  and  trace  their  proper  rela- 
tions to  the  Christianity  coexisting  with  them.  They  involve 
such  a  mixture  of  truth  and  error,  right  and  wrong,  good  and 
evil,  that  it  is  difficult  even  to  state  fairly  both  sides  of  the 
question.  At  the  same  time,  any  overstatement  or  under- 
statement alike  might  prove  misleading  and  hurtful.    Trusting 


264  The  Sociological  Question. 

that  the  reader  will  judge  the  arguments  as  a  whole  rather 
than  in  detached  parts,  I  venture  now  to  speak  of  the  several 
kinds  and  grades  of  socialism  which  confront  the  American 
churches  and  with  which  they  must  soon  come  to  an  under- 
standing. 

Anti-Christian  Socialism. 

The  first  is  a  thoroughly  antichristian  socialism  which  is 
loud  and  forward,  but  not  formidable  in  numbers  or  influence. 
It  is  found  chiefly  among  the  French,  German,  Russian, 
Polish,  and  Hebrew  refugees,  known  as  "  Internationalists," 
though  it  gains  some  strange  recruits  on  our  own  soil.  It 
means  revolution  as  it  waves  the  black  and  red  flags,  which 
have  become  so  portentous  emblems  of  violence  and  blood- 
shed. Avowedly,  through  all  its  organs,  it  aims  to  annihilate 
the  Christian  institutions  of  the  church,  the  state,  and  the 
family,  and  to  bring  in  pure  anarchy,  either  as  essential  to  the 
freedom  of  the  individual  or  as  a  condition  precedent  to 
some  reconstruction  of  society  on  industrial  principles  for 
the  good  of  the  workingman.  By  whatever  subtle  reasonings 
it  vindicates  to  itself  such  ends,  there  can  be  no  mistaking  its 
means  and  methods.  These  are  not  arguments  or  even 
ballots,  but  the  torch  and  the  bomb  as  soon  as  they  shall  be- 
come practicable.  Its  incendiary  journals  plainly  advocate 
arson,  pillage,  assassination,  and  hail  the  discovery  of  dyna- 
mite as  a  timely  boon  to  the  anarchist.  Through  its  chief 
manifesto  at  Pittsburg  it  has  declared  that  "  the  Church  seeks  to 
make  complete  idiots  out  of  the  masses  by  leading  them  to  fore- 
go the  paradise  on  earth  for  a  fictitious  heaven; "  has  advised 
workmen  to  the  policy  of  "  revolutionary  conspiracy ;  "  and 
has  warned  their  oppressors  that  just  before  them  are  dawn- 
ing "  the  scarlet  and  sable  colors  of  the  Judgment  Day." 

At  first  sight  it  would  seem  that  Christianity  could  make 
no  terms  with  such  socialism,  but  must  simply  leave  it  in  the 
grasp  of  the  outraged  law  as  an  enemy  of  civilization  no  less 
than  religion.  Certainly  men  with  arms  in  their  hands  are 
not  open  to  reason,  and  dynamite  cannot  be  met  with  argu- 


Spurious  Christia7i  Socialism.  265 

ment.  Nor  will  the  issue  be  doubtful  should  anarchism  ever 
rouse  the  great  law-abiding  mass  of  the  people.  But  this  is 
not  precisely  the  most  Christian  mood  in  which  to  watch  the 
struggle.  Rather  may  such  fanatics  become  the  objects  of 
pity  and  sorrow  than  of  hatred.  It  should  not  be  forgotten 
that  the  French  anarchist  and  the  Russian  nihilist  are  the  off- 
spring of  corrupt  hierarchies  and  despotic  governments;  that 
generations  of  wrong  and  outrage  are  rankling  in  their  blood; 
and  that  these  hereditary  strains  are  not  to  be  checked  at 
once  even  by  an  environment  of  free  institutions.  In  their 
view  the  policeman,  the  capitalist,  the  clergyman,  are  only  old 
oppressors  in  new  guises.  It  is  not  necessary  to  persecute 
them,  but  only  to  make  their  existence  unreasonable.  If  the 
churches  cannot  reach  them  with  religious  teaching  and  con- 
solation, they  may  hope  at  least  to  arrest  the  growth  of  such 
madness  in  a  free  Christian  land. 

Spurious  Christian  Socialism. 

There  is,  secondly,  a  spurious  Christian  socialism,  which 
falsely  claims  for  itself  religious  doctrines  and  motives.  It  is 
a  more  American  product  than  anarchism,  though  a  remark- 
able form  of  it  has  been  imported  among  us  in  the  writings 
of  the  Russian  Count  Tolstoi.  It  expresses  itself  variously, 
not  only  in  communistic  associations  which  plead  a  scriptural 
warrant,  but  in  labor  fraternities  which  seek  to  indoctrinate 
as  well  as  to  organize  the  working  masses.  Its  assumption 
is  that  Christ  himself,  as  a  workingman,  founded  industrial 
socialism  ;  that  he  came  to  abolish  poverty  and  other  class 
distinctions ;  and  that  he  now  sides  with  the  great  labor 
movement  in  all  its  aims  and  efforts.  Consistently  it  speaks 
of  "Jesus  the  communistic  Anarchist,"  sings  hymns  to  "  the 
Carpenter  Christ,"  and  applies  the  parable  of  Lazarus  and 
Dives  to  the  impoverished  laborer  and  pampered  capitalist. 

The  charge  is  sometimes  made  that  this  bastard  form  of 
Christian  socialism  has  been  misbegotten  of  the  church  itself, 


266  The  Sociological  Questiojz. 

through  its  own  neglect  and  sin.  Workingmen,  it  is  said, 
having  been  long  treated  as  social  outcasts  by  the  respectable 
denominations,  have  learned  to  discriminate  between  the 
church  as  corrupted  with  wealth  and  worldliness  and  a  plain 
Christianity  retained  by  them  as  it  came  from  the  hands  of 
its  Author.  Rashly  seconding  such  views,  the  priest  has  left 
the  altar  and  the  minister  his  pulpit  to  lead  a  new  crusade 
against  the  rich  and  preach  another  Gospel  to  the  poor. 
Some  self-sacrificing  clergymen,  under  vows  of  poverty,  have 
openly  joined  the  ranks  of  the  poor  as  a  class  to  share  their 
hardships  and  espouse  their  cause ;  whilst  others  from  the 
pulpit  and  the  platform  are  eloquently  denouncing  our  luxuri- 
ous, pewed  churches  as  mere  religious  club-houses,  and  lay- 
ing at  their  doors  all  the  want,  crime,  and  wretchedness 
which  disgrace  our  civilization. 

Such  charges  ought  not  to  be  lightly  brought  nor  lightly 
tossed  aside.  If  they  seem  to  have  little  applicability  to  the 
rural  districts,  they  can  find  only  too  much  justification  in  our 
large  cities,  where  vast  accumulations  of  wealth,  through  the 
fashion  and  culture  which  wealth  brings,  tend  to  widen  the 
breach  between  the  social  extremes  and  render  even  their 
religious  intercourse  uncongenial,  if  not  impracticable.  There 
is  daneer  of  exaerseration  on  both  sides.  Without  extenuat- 
ing  the  faults  of  wealthy  congregations  we  should  not  forget 
their  costly  missions  and  personal  efforts  in  the  slums  and  at 
the  frontiers.  Without  belittling  the  grievances  of  laboring 
men,  we  must  remember  that  they  are  not  the  only  class 
alienated  from  Christianity,  but  may  be  merely  sharing  in  a 
general  worldliness  which  rages  outside  of  the  churches  far 
more  fiercely  than  within  them.  After  all  that  may  be  said 
there  will  remain  the  plain  duty  of  distinguishing  the  true 
from  a  false  Christian  socialism.  No  one,  high  or  low,  rich 
or  poor,  can  be  interested  in  having  evangelical  truths  carica- 
tured and  perverted. 


Christian  Doctrine  of  Social  Distinctioris.      267 

Christian  Doctrine  of  Social  Distinxtioxs. 

As  to  the  right  Christian  estimate  of  social  distinctions,  for 
example,  nothing  will  ever  be  gained  by  telling  only  half  the 
truth  because  the  other  half  may  be  unpopular.  It  is  simply 
a  degradation  of  Holy  Scripture,  well  meant,  but  thoughtless 
and  mischievous,  to  dwell  upon  the  incidents  that  our  Saviour 
was  the  son  of  a  carpenter,  that  some  of  his  apostles  were 
fishermen  and  his  disciples  taken  largely  from  the  common 
people,  and  then  throw  his  glorious  doctrine  into  the  opposite 
scale  as  a  mere  makeweight  for  the  want  of  social  culture. 
It  is  bartering  with  the  world  upon  its  own  terms,  and  no 
marvel  if  it  be  accepted  as  but  the  homage  of  envy.  Besides, 
it  is  not  founded  on  facts.  The  authors  of  such  writings  as 
the  Gospels  and  Epistles  could  not  have  been  wholly  illiterate 
and  rude.  The  truth  is,  that  many  of  the  distinctions  of 
modern  society  did  not  exist  among  the  ancient  Hebrews. 
The  prejudice  against  manual  labor  was  little  known,  and 
avocations  which  are  now  simply  respectable  were  then  even 
honorable,  associated  with  rank  and  learning.  Every  well- 
educated  Jewish  youth  was  taught  some  handicraft,  and 
would  have  been  disgraced  without  it.  If  St.  Paul  plied  his 
trade  of  tent-making  at  Corinth,  did  he  not  show  the  culture 
of  a  scholar  among  the  philosophers  of  Athens,  the  breeding 
of  a  gentleman  at  the  court  of  Festus,  and  the  patrician  spirit 
of  a  Roman  citizen  before  the  magistrates  of  Philippi  ?  Even 
that  Divine  Son  of  a  carpenter  himself,  as  his  human  genealogy 
shows,  came  of  a  lineage  older  than  the  Pharaohs  or  the 
Caesars  and  purer  than  Castilian  or  Norman  blood.  At  least 
a  few  high-born  women  and  honorable  personages  were  among 
his  followers  and  stood  by  him  when  the  crowd  deserted  him. 
Though  he  was  meek  and  lowly  in  heart,  his  life  was  ever 
noble  and  gentle.  A  man  of  sorrows,  yet  at  a  wedding-feast 
he  converted  water  into  another  beverage  with  exhilarating 
properties,  A  Saviour  of  harlots  and  lepers,  yet  in  his  per- 
fect wisdom  he  became  an  honored  guest  at  the  banquets  of 


268  The  Sociological  Question. 

the  rich  and  worldly,  while  the  Pharisees  sneered  at  him  as  a 
gluttonous  man  and  a  wine-bibber.  In  the  sorrowful  moment 
of  parting  from  his  disciples,  with  infinite  graciousness  he 
took  that  cup  which  is  the  pledge  of  friendship  the  world 
over  and  taught  them  how  to  drink  it  to  his  memory.  All 
through  his  insulted  anguish,  from  the  garden  to  the  cross, 
he  bore  himself  with  unspeakable  dignity,  forbearance,  and 
gentleness.  At  length  Jewish  austerity,  Grecian  culture,  and 
Roman  valor  alike  did  him  homage.  And  ever  since,  among 
his  followers,  the  highest  as  well  as  the  lowest  ranks  have  been 
represented — kings  and  queens,  scholars  and  soldiers,  artists, 
poets,  philosophers;  not  many  wise,  not  many  noble,  but  at 
least  enough  to  show  that  Christianity  is  of  no  class  or  con- 
dition, and  may  as  little  become  a  boast  of  ignorance  and 
vulgarity  as  a  haughty  claim  of  rank  and  culture. 

Christian  Doctrine  of  Poverty. 
It  is  important  also  to  discriminate  sound  Christian  teach- 
ing as  to  the  respective  conditions  of  poverty  and  wealth. 
On  this  point  scarcely  can  the  merest  truisms  be  uttered 
without  danger  of  misapprehension.  If  there  be  sometimes  a 
clerical  sycophancy  which  pays  court  to  the  rich  as  patrons 
of  religion,  yet  there  is  also  a  pulpit  demagogism  which 
flatters  the  poor  as  favorites  of  Heaven.  To  neither  abuse 
do  the  Scriptures  give  the  least  countenance.  The  man  with 
a  gold  ring  and  goodly  apparel  is  not  to  have  the  highest 
place  in  the  synagogue,  nor  yet  are  the  needy  masses  to  fol- 
low Christ  merely  for  the  loaves  and  fishes.  On  the  one  hand, 
no  virtue  or  grace  is  ever  attributed  to  simple  poverty  itself. 
Not  the  poor  in  this  world,  but  the  poor  in  spirit,  the  souls 
consciously  needing  truth  and  goodness,  shall  inherit  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.  Not  mere  physical  penury,  the  being 
cold  and  hungry  and  naked,  is  most  to  be  pitied,  but  that  dire 
moral  destitution  which  thinks  itself  rich  when  it  is  in  need 
of  all  spiritual  knowledge  and  grace  and  virtue.  On  the 
other  hand,  mere  wealth  is  never  stigmatized  as  a  sin,  or  a 


Christian  Doctrine  of  Property.  269 

crime.  Not  money  itself,  but  the  love  of  money,  is  the  root 
of  all  evil.  Not  riches  in  themselves,  but  the  making  haste 
to  get  them  and  the  setting  the  heart  upon  them,  are  to  be 
deprecated.  Moreover,  neither  extreme  poverty  nor  extreme 
wealth  is  accounted  favorable  to  piety  and  virtue.  The  poor, 
amid  their  cares  and  sorrows,  are  tenderly  entreated  to  take 
no  thought  for  food  or  raiment,  but  to  trust  in  a  heavenly 
Father,  who  feeds  the  birds  of  the  air  and  clothes  the  lilies  of 
the  field.  The  rich,  amid  their  luxuries  and  pleasures,  are 
solemnly  admonished  that  they  may  fall  into  temptation  and 
into  many  foolish  and  hurtful  lusts,  which  drown  men  in 
destruction  and  perdition.  If  the  poor  man,  in  his  wretched- 
ness and  despair,  is  sometimes  tempted  to  curse  God  and  die, 
yet,  the  rich  man  in  his  glory  and  pride  finds  it  proverbially 
hard  to  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God. 

Christian  Doctrine  of  Property. 

Most  of  all  has  it  become  needful  at  this  time  to  distinguish 
and  re-assert  the  true  Christian  doctrine  of  property.  We 
seem  fast  nearing  a  crisis  in  the  strife  between  labor  and 
capital.  On  the  one  side  are  the  great  national  leagues  of 
tradesmen  and  workmen  organizing  universal  strikes  and 
boycotts,  and  broaching  the  most  revolutionary  theories  as  to 
the  origin  and  distribution  of  wealth  ;  while  on  the  other  side 
are  the  vast,  overgrown  fortunes,  which  represent  no  just 
earnings  of  their  owners,  the  oppressive  corporations  which 
are  pressing  wages  down  to  the  point  of  starvation,  and  the 
imperial  monopolies  which  are  controlling  our  elections  and 
legislatures.  Between  these  two  mustered  forces  the  voice  of 
Divine  wisdom  speaks  with  no  uncertain  sound.  For  the 
capitalist  it  has  some  timely  lessons.  It  charges  them  that 
are  rich  in  this  world  that  they  be  not  high-minded  nor  trust 
in  uncertain  riches,  and  warns  them  that  by  the  passion  for 
money-getting  some  have  erred  from  the  faith  and  pierced 
themselves  through  with  many  sorrows.  It  teaches  the 
millionaire  that  his  wealth  is  not   absolute   property,  but  a 


270  The  Sociological  Question. 

sacred  trust  from  the  sovereign  Creator  for  the  good  of  his 
fellow-creatures,  and  if  that  trust  be  neglected  or  perverted 
the  unfaithful  steward  shall  lose  even  that  which  he  seemeth 
to  have.  It  requires  of  masters  or  employers  that  they  use 
not  their  neighbor's  services  without  just  wages,  nor  let  the 
sun  go  down  upon  his  hire  unpaid,  nor  cause  him  to  do  any 
work  on  the  seventh  day  of  rest.  It  denounces  the  usurer, 
who  has  increased  his  substance  by  unjust  gain,  built  his 
house  with  unrighteousness,  and  filled  his  chambers  with  the 
spoil  of  the  poor.  By  prophet  and  evangelist  it  foretells  that 
Jehovah  will  be  a  swift  witness  against  all  that  oppress  the 
hireling  in  his  wages,  and  calls  upon  rich  men  to  weep  and 
howl  for  the  miseries  that  are  to  come  upon  them  in  the  day 
when  the  cries  of  laborers,  whose  hire  is  kept  back  by  fraud 
have  entered  into  the  ears  of  the  Lord  of  Sabaoth.  For  the 
laborer  also  it  has  some  needed  counsels.  It  tells  the  work- 
ing masses  what  Christ  himself  told  them,  that  he  came  to 
preach  the  Gospel  to  the  poor,  not  that  he  came  to  abolish 
poverty,  and  urges  them  to  seek  first  the  kingdom  of  God, 
and  food  and  raiment  and  all  good  things  shall  be  added  to 
them.  It  exhorts  all  that  are  in  service  or  at  labor  that  they 
be  faithful  and  diligent,  treating  their  masters  or  employers  as 
brethren,  not  with  eye-service  as  men-pleasers,  but  in  single- 
ness of  heart,  fearing  God,  and  having  his  blessing  when  they 
suffer  wrongfully.  The  vagabond  and  the  idler  are  warned 
that  if  any  man  will  not  work  neither  shall  he  eat,  and  that 
he  that  neglects  to  provide  for  his  own  household  is  worse 
than  an  infidel.  The  socialist  agitator  may  learn  that  although 
Jesus  told  the  rich  young  ruler  to  sell  all  he  had  and  give  to 
the  poor,  yet  he  did  not  tell  either  him  or  them  that  he  was 
depriving  the  poor  of  their  rights.  The  communist  will  find 
that  the  disciples  at  Pentecost  did  not  deny  the  right  of 
property  in  lands  or  goods,  but  merely  offered  in  charity  that 
which  was  their  own  freely  to  give  or  to  withhold,  and  after- 
wards themselves  became  objects  of  the  same  charity  in  the 
churches.     To  the  anarchist  in  his  blind  mood  of  vengeance 


Christian  Doctri^ie  of  Property.  271 

the  learned  pulpit,  the  artistic  ritual,  the  cathedral  spire,  may- 
seem  wasteful  as  the  alabaster  box  with  which  Mary  wor- 
shiped her  Lord,  but  only  another  Judas  could  murmur  that 
all  this  might  be  sold  for  much  and  given  to  the  poor. 
Finally,  for  both  laborer  and  capitalist  there  are  those  great 
perennial  lessons  of  Christian  brotherhood,  sympathy,  for- 
bearance, charity,  which  alone  can  insure  the  moral  concord 
of  capital  and  labor,  and  at  length  reconcile  and  unite  the  poor 
and  the  rich  as  members  of  the  one  body  of  Christ  and 
inmates  of  the  temple  whose  maker  is  God. 

Without  adding  more  instances  of  such  Christian  teaching, 
we  now  have  enough  before  us  to  show  that  the  pseudo- 
Christian  socialism  consists  not  so  much  of  positive  errors  as 
of  partial  truths,  or  truths  forced  out  of  their  due  proportions 
and  relations  in  the  general  system  of  social  doctrine.  As 
the  churches  come  in  contact  with  such  socialism — and  some 
contact  if  not  conflict  is  inevitable — they  will  have  the  import- 
ant task  of  sifting  truth  from  error,  in  order  to  throw  them- 
selves heartily  into  sympathy  with  the  toiling  masses  along 
the  line  of  their  just  grievances  and  sufferings.  Of  this  en- 
lightened sympathy  we  have  already  had  noble  examples  in 
philanthropists,  like  Howard,  Wilberforce,  Raikes,  Shaftes- 
bury, Peabody,  who  have  cared  for  prisoners,  slaves,  outcast 
women, homeless  children,  and  houseless  laborers;  in  zealous 
evangelists,  like  Wesley  and  Whitefield,  who  have  preached 
to  the  neglected  poor  outside  of  the  established  churches  ;  as 
well  as  in  earnest  churchmen,  like  Chalmers,  Maurice,  Kings- 
ley,  Toynbee,  who  have  conducted  industrial  reforms  not 
inconsistent  with  their  churchmanship.  Of  such  sympathy, 
too,  we  now  have  cheering  expressions  in  church  dignitaries 
like  Cardinal  Gibbons,  the  House  of  Bishops  and  other  cleri- 
cal assemblies,  who  are  issuing  timely  counsels  on  the  mutual 
rights  and  duties  of  laborers  and  employers  ;  in  faithful  pas- 
tors and  devoted  laymen,  who  are  maintaining  chapels,  schools, 
reading-rooms  for  employees  in  their  hours  of  rest  and  recre- 
ation ;  and  above  all,  in  that  intelligent  body  of  Christian 


272  The  Sociological  Question. 

workingmen   who   have  not  thought  it   necessary  to  break 

away  from  their  respective  churches  because  they  have  joined 

labor  oreanizations  in  efforts  to  relieve  and  elevate  their  fel- 

low-laborers. 

Non-Christian  Socialism. 

We  come  lastly  to  a  non-Christian  socialism,  which  is  secu- 
lar in  its  spirit  and  wholly  economic  in  its  aims.  It  is  some- 
times said  that  the  mass  of  European  socialists  are  secularists 
or  atheists,  whose  religion  consists  in  worshiping  man  as  God 
and  making  our  earth  their  only  Heaven.  The  leaders  of 
the  socialistic  labor  party  are  monists  or  materialists.  With- 
out bringing  such  charges  against  our  new  nationalistic 
socialism,  we  may  say  that  it  has  at  least  a  lack  of  Christian 
elements,  and  consequently  that  such  moral  elements  as  it 
retains  are  somewhat  perverted  or  defective.  At  the  same 
time  we  shall  find  that  it  has  no  sympathy  with  anarchical  or 
revolutionary  socialism,  since  it  expects  to  see  society  reformed 
and  transformed  peacefully  and  gradually  by  means  of  public 
opinion,  and  through  existing  modes  of  political  action  at  the 
polls  and  in  the  legislature.  Its  spirit  may  best  be  shown  by 
two  popular  treatises  which  are  now  selling  by  the  hundred 
thousand  copies. 

The  work  of  Mr.  Henry  George,  entitled  "  Progress  and 
Poverty,"  is  written  in  so  clear  a  style,  depicts  so  boldly  the 
wrongs  and  sufferings  of  laboring  people,  and  is  so  full  of 
humane  sentiments  and  pathetic  appeals  in  their  behalf,  that 
it  would  be  much  pleasanter  to  dwell  upon  its  truths,  than 
upon  its  errors.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  latter  will  not 
neutralize  the  former.  As  we  have  left  far  behind  us  the 
age  when  obnoxious  books  were  ordered  to  be  burned  by  the 
hangman,  every  fair-minded  citizen  must  approve  a  recent 
judicial  decision  legalizing  the  circulation  of  this  volume. 
But  many  will  not  adopt  one  of  the  opinions  upon  which  that 
decision  was  based,  that  there  can  be  no  immoral  tendency  in 
a  work  which  teaches  that  it  would  be  morally  right  for 
the  people  to  seize  all  landed  estates  without  paying  anything 


Non-Christian  Socialism.  273 

for  them  or  for  the  cost  of  maintaining  them.  Had  Mr. 
George  presented  his  scheme  of  nationalizing  land  or  confis- 
cating rent  simply  as  an  economic  measure,  to  be  effected 
with  due  regard  to  acquired  rights  and  existing  interests,  it 
would  have  been  at  least  debatable,  and  perhaps  something 
might  have  been  said  in  favor  of  it.  But,  unhappily,  he  has 
mixed  with  it  ethical  teachings  which  the  Christian  conscience 
cannot  accept,  and  suggested  popular  movements  which 
might  prove  as  revolutionary  as  the  general  land-robbery  of 
the  dark  ages. 

In  that  pleasant  social  romance  styled  "  Looking  Back- 
ward," Mr.  Edward  Bellamy  has  brought  Utopia  as  near  to 
us  as  the  next  century,  and  thrown  over  it  a  color  of  proba- 
bility by  tracing  its  growth  out  of  our  own  industrial  system 
through  the  process  of  nationalizing  railways,  telegraphs, 
manufactures,  all  forms  of  business  and  modes  of  life.  As 
we  turn  the  fascinating  pages  there  rises  before  us  the  image 
of  our  national  government  as  a  vast  complex  automaton, 
marshahng  its  millions  of  puppet-like  citizens  through  their 
countless  pursuits,  under  self-executing  laws,  with  all  the 
order  and  grace  of  the  most  faultless  mechanism.  But  on 
looking  a  little  more  closely,  we  are  ready  to  smile  as  grimly 
as  the  genial  Dr.  Leete  himself  when  we  find  that  somehow 
our  old  human  depravity  has  disappeared  in  the  process. 
Men  have  been  made  virtuous  and  happy  by  act  of  Congress  ; 
and  the  preacher  of  the  twentieth  century  is  informing  his 
myriad  hearers  through  the  telephone  that  "  the  ten  Com- 
mandments have  become  well-nigh  obsolete,"  and  with  them 
all  the  crimes  and  miseries  of  former  ages. 

Of  the  political  socialism  represented  by  both  of  these 
works  it  should  be  said  gladly,  that  its  bearing  towards 
Christianity  is  not  unfriendly,  though  too  silent  and  inappre- 
ciative.  Mr.  George,  while  he  is  wiser  than  some  clerical  re- 
cruits who  are  citing  chapter  and  verse  for  his  bad  ethics,  is 
always  reverent  in  his  few  religious  allusions.  Mr.  Bellamy 
even  claims  his  perfect  commonwealth  to  be  a  Christian  ideal, 
18 


274  The  Sociological  Qtiestion. 

but  depicts  it  as  having  been  achieved  under  the  natural  laws 
of  social  progress,  through  mere  industrial  and  political 
expedients,  not  only  without  miraculous  or  providential 
agencies,  but  without  the  moral  and  religious  means  of  social 
regeneration.  These  grave  defects  of  nationalism  are  begin- 
ning to  be  felt  in  minds  having  no  religious  or  sectarian  bias, 
Mr.  Frederic  Harrison  draws  from  the  London  strikes  the 
lesson  that  "industry  must  be  moralized  by  education,  by 
morality,  by  religion — not  recast  by  the  State."  Prince 
Bismarck,  as  the  leader  of  political  socialism  in  Germany, 
has  been  endeavoring  to  effect  an  alliance  with  Catholic 
socialism  in  favor  of  his  scheme  of  national  insurance  for 
the  laboring  classes.  As  yet  such  measures  have  not  become 
practical  or  practicable  in  our  own  politics.  But  it  is  safe  to 
say  that  the  genius  of  a  Christian  people  will  never  allow  its 
Christianity  to  be  wholly  divorced  from  its  social  reforms. 
And  the  emerging  problem  now  is  how  to  effect  this  cooper- 
ation consistently  with  our  traditional  theory  of  an  absolute 
separation  of  church  and  state. 

Church  and  State  Socialism. 
On  the  first  view  it  would  seem  that  our  state-socialism  and 
church-socialism,  if  such  terms  may  be  used,  might  come  to 
a  cordial  understanding,  at  least  as  to  their  common  aims, 
and  largely  as  to  their  methods  of  attaining  them.  Since  the 
church  includes  while  it  transcends  the  state  in  its  scope, 
their  spheres  become  coincident  in  respect  to  the  whole  phy- 
sical and  moral  improvement  of  society.  Such  improvement, 
from  the  most  religious  point  of  view,  is  good  as  far  as  it 
goes ;  comes  first  in  the  order  of  nature,  of  opportunity,  and 
of  urgency ;  and  is  only  part  of  the  Christian  conception  of  a 
more  general  improvement,  embracing  the  spiritual  with  the 
material  interests  of  humanity.  In  this  common  sphere  have 
gradually  arisen  many  practical  questions  in  which  all  philan- 
thropic citizens,  both  in  and  out  of  the  churches,  are  interested, 
such  as  the  relief  of  the  poor  and  unemployed,  the  sanitary 


Church  a7id  State  Socialism.  275 

safety  of  their  dwellings  and  workshops,  the  security  of  their 
Sundays,  holidays,  and  daily  hours  of  rest  from  labor;  the 
rescue  of  young  children  from  premature  toil  and  vicious 
training;  their  education,  physical,  intellectual,  moral,  and  in- 
dustrial ;  the  repression  of  the  social  vices  of  licentiousness, 
intemperance,  gambling,  and  vagrancy ;  reform  of  the  primary 
meeting,  the  caucus,  the  ballot,  and  suppression  of  bribery  in 
elections  and  legislatures;  civil  service  reforms;  scientific 
legislation  on  social  questions.  As  to  all  these  and  many 
other  like  objects  the  religious  and  the  political  socialist  are 
already  substantially  agreed  ;  but  as  to  the  best  methods  of 
reaching  these  objects  they  do  not  proceed  far  together  before 
they  begin  to  diverge  along  opposite  lines  of  action.  The 
Christian  socialist  of  the  old-fashioned  school  looks  upon  the 
State  as  a  wholly  worldly  institution  ;  limits  its  educational 
functions  to  such  schools  as  may  qualify  the  citizen  for  voting ; 
cares  little  even  for  the  Bible  as  obligatory  in  such  schools  ; 
would  not  legislate  beyond  the  public  conscience  on  moral 
questions ;  and,  in  a  word,  would  reserve  for  the  churches  all 
the  higher  education  and  humane  effort,  as  likely  to  be 
spurious  if  not  surcharged  with  evangelical  doctrines  and  mo- 
tives. On  the  other  hand,  the  Christian  socialist  of  the  new 
nationalistic  school  looks  upon  the  State  as  itself  an  edu- 
cational and  moral  agency;  claims  for  it  the  right  to  give 
the  people  the  highest  schools  that  they  may  desire  for  in- 
dustrial and  even  professional  training;  advocates  prohibitory 
laws  against  social  vices ;  would  nationalize  all  industries  as 
fast  as  they  become  monopolistic ;  and  in  the  end  would 
render  the  government  as  humane  and  even  Christian  as  the 
churches  can  make  it.  Fortunately,  these  differences  as  yet 
are  more  theoretical  than  practical,  and  the  church-socialist 
and  state-socialist  may  find  large  common  ground  where  they 
can  work  together  without  collision  or  conflict. 

It  is  important,  however,  to  clear  this  common  ground  of 
some  popular  fallacies  which  are  found  in  many  forms  of 
socialism  of  the  non-Christian   or  secular  type.     Some   of 


276  The  Sociological  Question. 

these  fallacies  have  been  inherited  or  imported  from  Euro- 
pean states  of  society,  but  others  are  due  to  crude  notions  in 
economic  science  or  to  an  abuse  of  our  democratic  institu- 
tions. They  should  be  clearly  and  fearlessly  exposed,  in 
order  to  distinguish  social  grievances  which  are  slight  and 
imaginary  from  those  which  are  real  and  urgent  and  the  only 
proper  object  of  a  true  Christian  philanthropy. 

The  Masses  and  the  Classes. 
One  very  common  fallacy  is  the  false  issue  of  the  "  masses 
against  the  classes."  The  phrase  has  more  rhyme  than 
reason.  In  one  view  the  masses  simply  compose  the  classes. 
Even  the  so-called  working  masses  have  the  class  element  in 
their  trades  unions,  and  express  it  in  the  very  title  of  their 
"Noble  Order  of  the  Knights  of  Labor."  Their  most  intelli- 
gent champions,  such  as  Hendrik  Ibsen  and  Powderly,  have 
urged  that  they  may  oppose  a  genuine  aristocracy  of  charac- 
ter and  moral  worth  to  the  old  aristocracies  of  birth,  of  wealth, 
and  of  learning.  The  more  of  such  a  class  spirit  we  can  get 
the  better  will  it  be  for  all  classes.  The  fact  would  seem  to 
be  that  our  socialistic  friends  often  use  the  word  "  class " 
when  they  mean  "  caste."  In  aristocratic  countries,  like 
England  and  Germany,  where  classes  have  long  since  hard- 
ened into  castes  with  impassable  barriers  between  them,  the 
most  radical  socialism  might  have  a  plea  and  a  mission  ;  but 
not  in  a  democratic  country  like  ours,  where  the  prizes  of  life 
are  open  to  all  classes,  the  lowest  as  well  as  the  highest. 
With  no  law  of  primogeniture  to  keep  wealth  and  power  in 
the  same  families,  every  other  generation  is  likely  to  be  at  the 
bottom  of  the  wheel  of  fortune.  Our  millionaires  with  few 
exceptions,  were  laboring  men,  who  did  not  inherit  but  made 
their  money  ;  and  their  menacing  accumulations  will  soon 
become  divided  and  squandered  among  their  descendants,  or 
perpetuated  only  in  great  beneficiary  bequests ;  the  ambition 
to  found  a  college  or  library  having  taken  the  place  of  the 
old  ambition  to  found  a  family  and  gain  a  title.     In  our  poli- 


Capitalistic  Laboring  Classes.  277 

tics,  too,  laboring  men  become  the  idols  and  rulers  of  the 
people,  whilst  trained  statesmen  take  second  places  in  their 
cabinets.  One  of  our  Presidents  was  a  rail-splitter,  another  a 
tailor,  another  a  boatman  ;  and  bootblacks,  shoemakers,  and 
blacksmiths  have  become  potent  in  our  highest  legislatures. 
Our  science  and  literature,  also,  are  largely  recruited  from  the 
ranks  of  toil,  or  pursued  by  men  who  can  work  with  their 
brains  only  because  their  kindred  before  them  have  worked 
with  their  hands.  Even  in  the  most  conspicuous  circles  of 
fashion  the  children  or  grand-children  of  workingmen  are 
seen  gracefully  entertaining  aristocratic  visitors  from  the  Old 
World,  whilst  descendants  of  our  colonial  gentry  may  be 
found  living  in  poverty  and  obscurity.  Good  breeding  thus 
becomes  diffused  with  the  wealth  which  fostered  it,  and  work- 
men and  tradesmen  inherit  the  instincts  of  gentlemen.  How 
absurd  to  talk  of  class  tyranny  in  such  a  state  of  society  ? 
How  futile  any  war  against  such  classes.  And  how  dismal 
would  life  be  without  them  ?  Let  us  not  confound  political 
equality  with  social  equality.  We  have  abolished  castes  with 
all  hereditary  powers  and  privileges,  but  we  can  never  abolish 
those  classes  which  are  rooted  in  the  original  diversities  of 
human  nature.  Nor  would  any  of  us  be  quite  ready  for  a 
socialism  that  should  march  through  society  cutting  off  every 
man's  head  that  is  an  inch  higher  than  his  neighbor's. 

Capitalistic  Laboring  Classes. 
Another  fallacy  is  the  false  division  of  society  into  only  the 
two  classes,  "  the  laborers  and  the  capitalists."  The  classifica- 
tion, as  often  made,  is  crude,  and  easily  becomes  vague  and 
misleading.  There  is  no  capitalistic  class  as  opposed  to  a 
laboring  class.  Not  only  are  the  laborer  and  the  capitalist 
always  changing  places  through  the  vicissitudes  of  trade,  but 
they  are  everywhere  combined  in  the  same  persons  and  in 
the  same  classes.  Many  laborers  are  also  capitalists.  The 
workman  who  toils  by  the  day  saves  out  of  his  earnings 
enough  capital  to  be  invested  in  a  homestead.     The  artisan, 


278  The  Sociological  Questio?z. 

the  engineer,  the  inventor,  whose  toil  is  even  congenial,  have 
a  capital  in  their  skill  which  may  yield  them  larger  returns 
than  the  salaries  paid  in  the  learned  professions.  The  trades- 
man, the  merchant,  whose  toil  is  almost  luxurious,  retire  with 
the  fortune  of  a  millionaire.  In  like  manner  many  capitalists 
are  also  laborers.  The  farmer  whose  capital  is  in  land  and 
implements,  works  harder  and  longer  than  m.any  a  mechanic. 
The  lawyer,  the  doctor,  the  clergyman,  whose  capital  is  in 
knowledge,  often  die  of  sheer  exhaustion  as  brain-workers. 
The  manufacturer  or  the  railway  king,  whose  capital  is  in 
machinery  or  bonds,  is  sometimes  more  overworked  than  any 
of  his  employees  or  dependents.  In  fact,  with  the  exception 
of  a  few  idlers  at  both  extremes  of  the  social  scale,  the  great 
mass  of  the  American  people,  whether  as  capitalists  or  as 
laborers,  are,  in  one  way  or  another,  working  for  their  living. 
It  is,  therefore,  scarcely  possible  to  take  sides  either  with 
labor  or  with  capital.  Every  citizen  is  interested  in  their  just 
cohesion,  and  in  any  so-called  conflict  between  them  might  be 
found  fighting  against  himself  as  well  as  against  his  neighbor. 

Derangement  of  Social  Classes. 

By  far  the  most  serious  fallacy  now  current  is  a  false  pre- 
dominance claimed  for  the  laboring  class  overall  other  classes. 
It  is  a  predominance  not  justified  by  the  importance  of  any 
single  class  in  the  social  system,  and  a  predominance  some- 
times asserted  against  the  peace  and  order  of  whole  communi- 
ties. We  have  seen  the  commerce  of  half  a  dozen  Western 
States  deranged  and  the  traffic  of  our  large  cities  hindered  for 
days  whilst  a  few  workmen,  at  the  call  of  one  master  work- 
man, were  parleying  with  their  employers  for  better  terms  of 
employment.  Such  indifference  or  obliviousness  to  all  other 
social  interests  is  intelligible  and  excusable  enough  in  men 
who  for  the  time  are  absorbed  in  their  own  sufferings  and 
intent  only  on  getting  their  rights.  But  it  makes  a  different 
impression  in  the  formal  manifesto  and  calm  treatise.  Accord- 
ing to  its  platform  the  Socialistic  Labor  Party  would  exalt  the 


Dera7igement  of  Social  Classes.  279 

manual  laborer  as  the  sole  producer  and  owner  of  all  existing 
wealth,  and  hope  for  some  complete  inversion  or  depression 
of  the  social  classes  in  his  behalf.  Mr.  Bellamy,  in  his  ideal 
republic,  would  force  all  classes  alike  through  long  apprentice- 
ships of  manual  toil  before  they  can  even  be  admitted  to  the 
higher  forms  of  mental  labor.  This  is  trying  to  make  the 
pyramid  of  society  revolve  from  its  apex  to  its  base.  Its 
material  interests  must  ever  remain  subordinate  to  its  moral 
and  spiritual  interests.  A  legislative  rule  of  the  laboring 
class,  if  established,  could  not  be  long  maintained  without 
Christian  knowledge  and  virtue.  Nor  are  we  ready  in  this 
country  to  have  any  class  dominant :  not  the  wealthy  class  ; 
not  the  learned  class  ;  not  even  the  clerical  class  ;  still  less 
that  laboring  class,  least  fitted  for  leadership  in  all  the  higher 
spheres  of  civilization,  such  as  education,  science,  art,  and 
religion. 

Having  thus  touched  upon  some  of  the  socialistic  fallacies 
of  the  day,  we  can  now  make  them  throw  into  stronger  relief 
the  real  wrongs  and  sufferings  of  our  laboring  people.  These 
will  still  assert  themselves  after  all  the  abatements  that  have 
been  made.  Whilst  it  may  be  true,  as  we  have  seen,  that  the 
avenues  to  wealth  and  power  are  open  to  the  lowest  ranks, 
yet  it  is  also  true  that  only  one  person  in  sixty  millions  can 
become  president;  very  few  will  win  any  of  the  other  prizes 
for  which  so  many  are  contending ;  and  the  great  mass  must 
remain  hewers  of  wood  and  drawers  of  water  as  effectually 
as  if  they  were  serfs  and  bondmen,  and  therefore  as  truly  the 
objects  of  Christian  kindness  and  care.  Whilst  it  may  be 
true  that  capital  and  labor  are  not  antagonistic,  yet  labor  is 
not  now  getting  its  full  share  of  their  joint  product,  owing 
to  changed  industrial  conditions.  Although  spiritual  inter- 
ests are  ever  superior,  yet  material  wants  are  still  fundamen- 
tal and  first  to  be  satisfied.  American  laborers,  too,  acquire 
more  luxurious  tastes  than  the  European,  and  share  more 
largely  the  average  intelligence  of  the  community.  Becom- 
ing keen-sighted  as  to  their  interests,  they  are  raising  prob- 


28o  The  Sociological  Question. 

lems  of  which  political  economists  had  not  dreamed,  and 
forcing  issues  which  our  statecraft  knows  not  how  to  meet. 
Let  us  remember  that  the  brain-worker  and  the  hand-worker 
are  fellow-laborers  and  members  of  the  same  body  politic. 
To  make  them  also  members  of  the  same  body  of  Christ  has 
become  the  most  difficult  and  momentous  task  ever  laid  upon 
the  American  churches. 

Social  Need  of  Church  Unity. 

If  we  now  survey  the  social  phenomena  which  the  whole 
discussion  has  brought  before  us,  we  shall  find  our  introduc- 
tory statement  more  than  justified.  Within  the  limits  of  the 
same  political  system  known  as  the  United  States  we  behold 
a  confused  mass  of  social  organizations,  detached  from  one 
another  and  from  the  government  which  overshadows  and 
protects  them.  In  the  midst  of  them  appears  a  great  cluster 
of  churches  and  denominations,  differing  endlessly  in  doctrine, 
polity,  and  worship,  held  apart  by  hereditary  feuds,  and  in- 
flamed with  sectarian  jealousy  and  pride.  ,  Around  these 
Christian  bodies,  like  a  beleaguering  army  intrenched  upon 
the  very  ground  once  belonging  to  them  as  their  natural 
domain,  are  countless  other  social  bodies  without  a  Christian 
name  or  even  a  Christian  spirit.  To  the  right  are  the  secular- 
ized charities  for  the  poor,  the  blind,  the  deaf,  the  maimed, 
the  fallen,  and  the  outcast,  on  whom  Christ  lavished  his 
miracles  of  love  and  power,  and  whom  he  bequeathed  to  the 
tender  care  of  his  followers  through  all  time.  To  the  left  are 
the  unchurched  fraternities  making  a  religion  of  masonry, 
fellowship,  insurance,  or  practicing  the  Christian  virtues  of 
brotherhood,  temperance,  charity,  under  heathen  names  and 
with  pagan  rites.  In  front  are  the  mustering  hosts  of  insur- 
gent labor  no  longer  asking  Christian  charity  but  demanding 
natural  justice,  gaining  recruits  from  the  Christian  ministry 
itself,  and  already  threatening  revolution,  violence,  and 
anarchy.  At  the  rear  are  the  retreating  bands  of  rational- 
ism, materialism,  agnosticism,  infidelity,  turning  Christian  lib- 


The  Chtirch  a   Great  Social  Teacher.        281 

erty  into  license  and  recoiling  with  random  fire  upon  the  ranks 
which  they  have  deserted.  Meanwhile  the  churches  them- 
selves, although  thus  out-flanked  on  each  side,  desperately 
assailed  in  front  and  treacherously  weakened  in  the  rear,  still 
stand  asunder,  without  union,  without  discipline,  without  en- 
thusiasm against  their  common  foes.  Add  to  all  this  that 
just  now,  at  the  very  height  of  these  encompassing  perils, 
they  are  engaged  in  fresh  disputes  over  their  respective  creeds 
and  forms,  and  we  have  the  actual  situation  of  the  Christian 
denominations  in  American  society  at  the  present  time. 

Upon  this  situation  I  remark  in  general  that  mere  Christian 
unity,  the  so-called  unity  of  the  invisible  church,  does  not 
meet  the  social  exigency  of  the  churches.  The  simple  fact 
that  they  are  all  Christian  sects,  composed  largely  of  true 
Christians  loyal  to  Christ,  means  no  more  to  the  point  than 
that  they  are  like  so  many  wrangling  masses  of  patriots  before 
a  disciplined  army  of  invaders  and  traitors.  The  invisible 
unity  of  the  denominations  must  become  visible,  potent,  and 
aggressive.  They  can  never  rout  their  common  foes  by  sally- 
ing among  them  single-handed  or  in  scattered  bands.  They 
can  never  cope  with  the  social  perils  around  them  until  they 
have  some  outward  agreement,  some  concentrated  leadership, 
some  concerted  action ;  in  a  word,  some  organic  unity. 

The  Church  a  Great  Social  Teacher. 
In  the  first  place,  without  organic  unity  the  Church  cannot 
fulfil  its  mission  as  the  great  moral  teacher  of  society.  If  it 
is  to  become  the  light  of  the  world,  it  must  illuminate  the 
social  relations  and  duties  of  men  as  members  of  the  family 
and  of  the  State  no  less  than  of  the  Church  itself.  But  in 
order  thus  to  instruct  the  multitudes  still  outside  the  denomi- 

* 

nations,  mere  denominational  teaching  is  not  needed.  Such 
teaching,  in  fact,  has  proved  a  hindrance  and  a  failure.  The 
missionary  abroad  sends  back  to  us  word  that  he  cannot 
preach  a  sectarian  gospel  to  the  heathen ;  and  the  missionary 
at  home  tells  us  the  same  tale.     The  untaucrht   masses  think 


*£>* 


282  The  Sociological  QiLcstion. 

they  do  not  want  a  sectarian  Christianity,  and  they  are  right. 
How  can  the  denominations  teach  them  Christian  brother- 
hood when  they  do  not  themselves  treat  one  another  as 
brethren  ?  How  can  they  teach  Christian  spirituality  when 
they  are  scrambling  together  for  worldly  place  and  power  ? 
How  can  they  teach  the  plainest  Christian  doctrines  and 
duties  when  they  are  ever  visibly  subordinating  them  to  sec- 
tarian dogmas  and  sectarian  aggrandizement  ?  If  each  of  the 
fifty  sects  could  accomplish  its  aim  and  plant  an  endowed 
church  in  every  frontier  village  and  in  every  city  mission, 
what  a  babel  of  religious  teaching  they  would  make,  and  how 
the  objects  of  such  teaching  would  laugh  them  to  scorn.  Yet 
something  like  this  is  passing  before  their  eyes.  Moreover, 
at  a  time  when  the  wildest  notions  are  abroad  in  respect  to 
the  social  problems  of  the  day,  it  becomes  imperative  that  the 
denominations  as  one  Church  should  utter  forth  one  accord- 
ant voice  in  the  name  of  their  common  Head  and  Lord. 

The  Church  the  Conservator  of  Society. 

In  the  second  place,  without  organic  unity  the  Church 
cannot  perform  its  whole  duty  as  the  conservator  of  society. 
That  it  may  act  as  the  salt  of  the  earth  it  must  purge  the 
divine  institutions  of  the  family  and  state  as  well  as  the  church 
itself,  from  the  corrupting  influences  and  revolutionary  assaults 
to  which  they  are  now  exposed.  But  in  thus  concentrating 
its  purifying  agencies  upon  the  social  masses  mere  denomi- 
national evangelism  will  not  alone  suffice.  It  does  not  reach 
the  physical  and  moral  degradation  which  prevent  them  from 
even  appreciating  spiritual  truths  and  influences.  To  attempt 
first  to  indoctrinate  them,  or  even  to  evangelize  them,  is  to 
begin  at  the  end.  They  feel  that  they  do  not  want  church  or 
gospel  so  much  as  fire,  food,  raiment,  and  shelter;  and  they 
cannot  get  the  former  until  they  have  the  latter.  If  the 
American  Evangelical  Alliance  should  accomplish  its  noble 
work,  and  by  systematic  visitation  gather  back  all  the  scat- 
tered sheep  of  Christ  into  their  proper  folds,  it  will  not  have 


The   Church  the  Social  Regenerator.         283 

touched  directly  a  single  one  of  the  social  problems  now 
pressing  for  solution.  Not  the  mere  indoctrination  of  the 
toiling  masses,  were  it  possible,  is  first  and  most  needed;  not 
alone  their  evangelization  as  now  attempted ;  but  their  moral- 
ization,  the  practical  application  of  Christian  ethics  among 
them,  as  Christ  himself  practiced  them,  in  care  for  their  bodies 
as  well  as  their  souls,  in  eleemosynary,  sanitary,  and  educa- 
tional reforms.  And  for  such  works  of  charity  how  wasteful, 
as  well  as  absurd,  are  denominational  divisions  and  sectarian 
efforts.  It  seems  but  a  truism  to  say  that  in  order  to  preserve 
the  family  in  safe  dwellings  and  pure  homes  among  all  classes, 
in  order  to  preserve  the  State  by  means  of  honest  politics  at 
the  polls  and  in  legislatures,  in  order  to  preserve  the  Church 
itself  amid  the  manifold  perils  which  now  menace  it, — the  de- 
nominations cannot  act  apart,  but  if  possible  must  act  together 
as  one  united  Church. 

The  Church  the  Social  Regenerator. 
In  the  third  place,  without  organic  unity  the  Church  can- 
not accomplish  its  destiny  as  the  regenerator  of  society.  Be- 
ing itself  a  new  social  organism  with  new  organizing  forces, 
it  must  yet  include  and  transform  the  organisms  of  the  family 
and  the  State,  as  but  smaller  spheres  within  its  own  grander 
sphere,  which  is  as  wide  as  humanity  itself  But  in  approach- 
ing this  promised  ideal  a  mere  cooperation  or  confederation 
of  denominations  falls  far  short  of  the  mark.  Such  a  league 
may  be  a  first  step,  but  it  cannot  be  the  last.  It  would  not 
exhibit  the  Church  to  the  world  as  in  itself  a  regenerate  soci- 
ety, and  it  would  not  embrace  surrounding  society  in  its  re- 
generative influence.  It  would  be  a  cluster  of  class  churches, 
not  one  church  of  all  classes.  It  would  still  subordinate 
church  unity  to  mere  denominationalism,  not  denomination- 
alism  to  true  church  unity.  And  it  would  soon  prove  to  have 
been  a  mere  makeshift  of  worldly  expediency  rather  than  the 
perfect  bond  of  Christian  charity.  Like  the  Confederate 
States,  which  could  not  exist  long  either  before  or  after  the 
United  States,  such  confederate  churches  could  only  suggest 


284  The  Sociological  Qtiestion. 

and  require  some  more  perfect  union  of  denominations  as  one 
catholic  Church. 

Church  Unity  Becoming  Practicable. 
In  the  fourth  place,  such  a  true  church  unity  is  becoming 
intelligible  and  practicable  in  American  society.  While  the 
Christian  denominations,  as  they  appear  in  the  Old  World, 
still  exist  as  established  churches  and  dissenting  bodies  in- 
capable of  unification,  the  same  denominations  as  transferred 
to  the  New  World,  and  brought  under  democratic  influences, 
have  been  sifted  together  for  a  hundred  years  and  assimilated 
until  now  they  differ  less  in  things  than  in  names.  Such  dif- 
ferences are  fast  disappearing  from  public  view.  The  long 
lost  ideal  of  one  catholic  Church  is  seizing  the  popular  mind 
like  a  passion  and  melting  away  all  prejudices  before  it.  Al- 
ready it  is  emerging  from  the  Utopian  stage  in  which  great 
social  movements  often  first  appear  to  the  generation  origina- 
ting them.  It  may  have  been  Utopian  to  look  for  a  dogmatic 
agreement  of  different  denominations,  or  even  for  a  dogmatic 
agreement  in  any  one  denomination.  This  never  existed  in 
the  church  of  the  apostles,  and  could  only  exist  in  the  church 
of  the  millennium,  if  it  ever  exist  at  all.  But  it  is  no  longer 
Utopian  to  look  for  an  ecclesiastical  unity  which  shall  embrace 
dogmatic  differences  and  allow  them  due  scope  and  action. 
Such  a  unity  once  prevailed.  In  the  New  Testament  church 
there  were  no  Episcopalian,  Presbyterian,  and  Congrega- 
tionalist  denominations,  but  only  congregational,  presbyterial, 
and  episcopal  principles  and  institutions  as  duly  combined  in 
one  organization.  That  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  might 
now  return  if  our  congregations  would  associate  in  free  pres- 
byteries, our  presbyteries  commit  their  episcopal  functions  to 
bishops,  and  our  bishops  become  conjoined  in  the  same 
historic  succession,  whatever  views  might  be  held  as  to  the 
need  or  value  of  that  succession.  The  most  extreme  degrees 
of  churchmanship,  as  well  as  the  most  varied  forms  of  de- 
nominationalism,  would  be  retained  and  satisfied  in  such  an 
ecclesiastical  system.     If  this  be  Utopian,  then  is  Christianity 


Urgent  Need  of  Church  Unity.  285 

itself  Utopian.  Can  that  unity  be  impracticable  in  religious 
society  which  has  already  become  actual  in  political  society  ? 
We  have  lived  to  see  the  most  diverse  climates,  north,  south, 
east,  and  west;  the  most  diverse  races,  European,  African, 
American,  Asiatic  ;  the  most  diverse  institutions,  social,  civil, 
political,  religious;  the  most  varied  nationalities,  English, 
French,  German,  with  the  most  embittered  factions,  all  merged 
in  the  United  States ;  and  are  we  never  to  see  the  so-called 
Christian  denominations  combining  as  united  churches  in  one 
American  Catholic  Church  ? 

Finally,  a  true  church  unity  is  becoming  urgent,  if  not  im- 
minent.    That  we  are  on  the  eve  of  great  social  changes  is  a 
growing-  feeline.     Our  democratic  institutions  are  passing  un- 
der  a  strain  such  as  they  have  never  before  known.     Accor- 
ding to  historical  analogy,  one  sign  of  revolution  is  the  very 
blindness  and  recklessness  of  those  who  should  be  the  first  to 
perceive  and  avert  it.     Among  the  polemic  divines  now  mus- 
tering to  fight  their  battles  over  again  this  appeal  for  unity 
may  sound  like  a  shepherd's  flute  amid  the  din  of  arms.     But 
communities,  like  individuals,  are  sometimes  driven  by  their 
very   passions    and    interests    into    the   paths   of  truth    and 
righteousness.     The  pressure  of  surrounding  perils  may  soon 
hasten  the  tardy  impulses  of  Christian  duty.     The  churches 
may  yet  be  melted  together  in  the  furnace  of  affliction.     When 
the  events  so  often  threatened  begin  to  happen  ;  when  our 
railways   and   telegraphs   have   been   paralyzed   by  national 
strikes;  when  workmen  and  soldiers  are  fighting  or  fraterniz- 
incr  in  the  streets  of  our  cities;  when  our  hoarded  capital  is 
outvoted  by  leagued  labor;  when  our  servile  legislatures  are 
discussing  the  very  measures  first  broached  in  the  Assembly 
of  the  French  Revolution ;  when  science  and  literature  and 
art  are  at  the  mercy  of  ignorance  and  rudeness,  and  virtue  and 
piety  have  been  scared  back  to  our  homes  and  altars — then, 
at    least,  will  it  have   become    plain   that   the  problems    of 
American  society,  if  solved  at  all,  can  only  be  solved  by  one 
United  Church  of  the  United  States. 


Date  Due 

ei 

SJh-t^ 

T 

-wIll^nAAinaeu* 

*« 

-.^-^. 

,.-    li^l 

» 

(l) 

'  r-iir^^szT^iu^'  i^^T^mmmmmmm^ 


Pfinceton  Theological  Seminary 


Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  01035  5149 


